Election 2014 Recommendations (including 10 Reasons to Vote for Coakley from this Berwick supporter)

Sent from Fred Berman, a good friend from Early Anti-Casino Days,  whose informed perspective is respected:

Dear Friends,

The following (replicated in the pdf attachment) are my Election Day recommendations. The ballot initiative recommendations (NYYY) are the same as being disseminated by Don Berwick, Progressive Mass, Sen. Jehlen and Rep. Provost (whose flyer I liberally borrowed from), and other like-minded progressives.

It took this ardent Don Berwick supporter a long time, a lot of research, and no small amount of letting go of old and continuing frustrations to compile my Ten Reasons for Voting for Martha Coakley for Governor.

The endorsements of Maura Healey (AG) and the listed Somerville-area State Senator and Representative candidates were a piece of cake, by comparison. (I'm sharing this beyond Somerville, to my anti-casino colleagues, including a few Baker supporters, I suspect. I welcome your feedback.)

I hope the information is useful to you.

Hyperlinked Table of Contents

· Q1: NO - Don't repeal legislation indexing the gas tax to inflation

· Q2: YES - Expand the Bottle Bill to include water and sports drinks

· Q3: YES - Repeal legislation allowing expanded gambling in MA

· Q4: YES - Require employers to allow workers to earn sick time (paid/unpaid sick time depends on size of firm)

· Governor: Martha Coakley - Ten Reasons for Voting for Martha Coakley for Governor

· Attorney General: Maura Healey

· State Senator: Pat Jehlen (2^nd Middlesex Senate District)

· State Rep: Denise Provost (27^th Middlesex) and Christine Barber (34^th Middlesex)

========================================================

Q1: Would REPEAL that portion of the gasoline tax which links increases to the rate of inflation. In 2013, the legislature raised the gas tax for the first time since 1991, by 3 cents a gallon.

Recommendation: NO - Repeal of indexing would allow Massachusetts to fall further behind on road and bridge disrepair, leaving drivers vulnerable to gaping potholes and crumbling overpasses, like Somerville's McGrath Highway. Losing revenue from indexing could also cost Massachusetts future federal funding, like the “New Starts” grant that Somerville is counting on to pay half the cost of the Green Line Extension. Visit: http://www.massaflcio.org/VoteNoQuestion1

==============

Q2: Would EXPAND the 5 cent bottle deposit to cover such beverages as sports drinks and bottled water.

Recommendation: YES - Almost 80% of deposit containers are recycled –only 23% of non-deposit. Passage of Bottle Bill Expansion would mean less litter on city streets and state roadways, and taxpayers would save big on litter pickup and trash disposal costs. Our parks and beaches and rivers -- including the Mystic -- would be a lot cleaner, too. Visit: www.yeson2ma.org

==============

Q3: Would REPEAL the State’s Casino Law, which created a powerful, non-elected commission to site 3 “destination” casinos and 1 slots parlor in Massachusetts, and which also empowers federally recognized tribes to open casinos.

Recommendation: YES - Partnering with the casino industry and embracing its predatory business model of promoting and exploiting addictive gambling is as wrong as it would be to join with the tobacco industry to encourage smoking. The social and economic costs of both would far exceed the new tax revenues. People haven't been putting their pennies in piggybanks waiting for casinos; they have been spending their discretionary income at local stores, restaurants, and entertainment venues... and buying Lottery tickets. Casinos will redirect that spending, hurting local business and eroding Lottery revenues. Highly touted gains in employment will be offset by layoffs and closures of local businesses (just as a new mall cannibalizes spending at smaller local shops). Lost Lottery revenues will jeopardize Local Aid to Cities and Towns. Expanded gambling will contribute to a host of social ills -- substance abuse, drunk driving, domestic violence and other crime, defaults and bankruptcies, etc. -- and require new regulatory infrastructure, all requiring higher State expenditures that offset revenue gains. Locally, the Everett casino will generate huge amounts of traffic, substantially worsening congestion problems. Surrounding towns will experience rising public safety costs and declining home values. Gov. Patrick, Speaker DeLeo, Senate President Murray and Frank Fahrenkopf (American Gaming Association CEO) all say they wouldn't want a casino in their hometown. I agree. Visit: http://repealthecasinodeal.org/ or watch the animation I created http://yeson3tv.com/?video=42

Note: YES on 3 would also finish the job begun in 2008 when Mass. overwhelmingly voted to end Greyhound racing. Unfortunately, greyhound simulcasting still occurs, due to a provision snuck into the 2011 expanded gambling bill in a backroom deal by Beacon Hill politicians. By voting YES on 3, voters can end greyhound simulcasting in Mass., as well as keeping casinos and slot machines out of our state. Why does it matter? Because thousands of dogs endure lives of confinement and suffer serious injuries as a direct result of greyhound racing. In Florida, where 75 percent of the races bet on by Massachusetts residents originate, a dog dies every three days. The only losers with a YES vote will be the dog owners and the simulcasting industry; no Massachusetts jobs will be lost, because there are no separate dog racing simulcast workers.

=============

Q4: Employees who work for employers having 11 or more employees could earn and use up to 40 hours of paid sick time per calendar year, while employees working for smaller employers could earn and use up to 40 hours of unpaid sick time per calendar year. Sick time would be earned at the rate of 1 hour of leave for every 30 hours worked, and could be used once the worker had been employed for 90 days.

Recommendation: YES - Nearly one million Mass. workers can't earn paid sick time, including 38% of all employed men and women living in Somerville. Many of those workers can't even earn unpaid sick time, and face job loss if they stay home when they get sick or their children are too sick to attend school or child care. These workers tend to be concentrated in service industries, so when they come to work sick, they put both their co-workers and the public at risk. In fairness to these workers and their families, and to improve community health, our workforce needs earned sick time. Visit: www.yeson4ma.org

=============

Governor: Martha Coakley

I was a strong supporter of Don Berwick, and Martha Coakley was my last choice in the Democratic Primary. She is painfully vague on some important questions, and I never imagined myself sending an email strongly urging a vote for Martha Coakley, but I've found enough on her and Charlie Baker's website, in their answers to questionnaires, and in their responses to interview questions, to feel confident that voting for Martha Coakley is the right recommendation. Here, then, are Ten Reasons for Voting for Martha Coakley for Governor:

#1. Why Charlie Bake is Not My Candidate: Although Charlie Baker appears to have more specific proposals for addressing the Commonwealth's challenges, he has made a no-new-taxes pledge and picked a Tea Party Republican as his running mate. If there's one thing that anyone who's running on his record as a CEO should know, it's that implementing good ideas takes resources.

Charlie Baker talks about creating an annual fund of $100 million for infrastructure repair ... at the same time as he opposes indexing the gas tax. He commits to increasing Local Aid; he talks about increasing State Budget spending on environmental programs, including more land acquisition , working with coastal cities and towns to develop and implement strategies for addressing rising sea level and storm-related concerns; he promises increased resources for treatment for addiction; he talks about expanding rehabilitative services for incarcerated persons; he calls for more extensive supportive services for homeless families and families at risk of homelessness ... all without increasing taxes or adding to the burdens of cities and towns. We've had Republican presidents and governors who made those same kinds of "you-can-have-it-all-and-it-won't-cost-you-anything" promises, and we know that it just isn't possible.

Baker does have some good ideas, and makes commitments we would like to believe in. But good CEOs know that with limited resources you have to make choices. When Harvard Pilgrim faced huge budget deficits, Charlie Baker made the decision to withdraw from the Western Mass. Medicare market, and terminate coverage to 3,500 seniors. As the Boston Globe reported, the consequences of Harvard Pilgrim's fiscal belt-tightening were even harsher for Rhode Island subscribers: "In December 1999, an ailing Harvard Pilgrim Health Care pulled out of Rhode Island with two months’ notice, shuttering the company’s three health centers there and forcing 1,200 physicians and other employees to search for new jobs. Thousands of patients suddenly had to find new doctors, and about 128,000 subscribers scrambled for other health insurance. The Ocean State accounted for about 10 percent of Harvard Pilgrim’s customers but 45 percent of its losses, and to save the company, new chief executive Charles D. Baker essentially cut off its Rhode Island leg."

These are the kind of decisions you make as a steely-eyed business executive, when you have only one bottom line. As a jurisdictional or state leader, the people you take an oath of office to serve, the environment you are entrusted to protect, and the future you commit to ensuring on behalf of the generations too young to vote are your bottom lines... in addition to taxpayers, bondholders, and campaign donors.

Charlie Baker's good ideas are only campaign rhetoric ... unless there are resources to back them up. And by making a no new taxes commitment, he has boxed himself into a corner, from which he won't be able to implement them.

#2. Martha Coakley is Right on 3 out of 4 Questions; Charlie Baker Takes All the Wrong Positions

• On Question 1, Coakley supports gas tax indexing; Baker opposes it. While none of us think the gas tax is the most progressive alternative, it is some of the only funding consistently available for infrastructure repair and development. If the gas tax was based on the price of gas and not the number of gallons sold, revenues would have gone up over the past decades without any indexing. As it is, with cars getting better mileage -- which of course is a good thing -- gas tax revenue will go down without indexing. And anyone who expects Mass. Legislators to proactively raise other funds for infrastructure, just hasn't been paying attention. As it is, the legislatively enacted gas tax increase was only a fraction of what's needed to address a two decade backlog of infrastructure repair during the Weld, Cellucci, and Romney administrations.
• On Question 2, Coakley supports the expanded bottle bill; Baker opposes it. While 80% of bottles with deposits are redeemed and recycled, only 23% of water and sports drink containers are redeemed or recycled; the rest end up as litter or landfill material. At a recent forum, Martha Coakley was unambiguously supportive, while Charlie Baker was unable to provide a clear reason for voting NO. The bottling industry has been taken to task for its misleading advertisements. Charlie Baker is on their side; Martha Coakley is on ours.
• On Question 3, alas, both Coakley and Baker have been hoodwinked by the gambling industry. Do I wish that Don Berwick was on the November ballot? Next question.
• On Question 4, Coakley is strongly in support of earned sick time (YES on Question 4). Charlie Baker opposes Question 4, claiming that only companies with 50 or more employees should have to offer paid sick time. The ballot initiative requires companies with 11 or more employees to allow workers to accrue paid sick time, and smaller companies to allow workers to accrue unpaid sick time. For thousands of low wage workers who are a paycheck away from eviction or utility shutoff or hunger, Charlie Baker's proposal would continue to leave only one viable choice: coming to work sick, where they infect their co-workers and customers.

#3. Charlie Baker supports the Death Penalty; Martha Coakley opposes it. As noted in a Boston Globe article about Bakers support for capital punishment in his last campaign, in addition to everything else that's wrong with the death penalty, it costs significantly more to pursue and implement than a prison alternative.

#4. Martha Coakley's education policies are more in line with the realities of working people.

• Recognizing the increasing body of evidence of the importance of pre-school participation and educational preparedness in determining educational and professional outcomes, Martha Coakley has made universal access to early education a top priority, starting with Massachusetts Gateway Cities; Charlie Baker has not.
• With respect to higher education, Martha Coakley's platform calls for full-need financial aid for students attending the state's Community Colleges; Charlie Baker has instead called for on-line learning options and three-year degrees ... which might be great for high-performing students, but is completely unrealistic for average working class community college students who need to support themselves while they learn.
• Martha Coakley understands and has worked to expose and punish the exploitive practices of for-profit colleges that provide misleading advice to prospective students about the courseloads they can handle and about the employment outcomes they can count on ... and then grow rich on the educational loans their students can't afford to repay; Charlie Baker is silent on this issue.

#5. Martha Coakley more squarely addresses the need for corrections reform. Although she doesn't go as far in favor of sentencing reform and community corrections as many progressives would like, Martha Coakley is explicit in her opposition to the construction of new prisons, so that we can "shift funding from prison expansion to focus on crime prevention and prisoner rehabilitation, including diversion, education and job training programs for court-involved or incarcerated individuals, and an expanded network of supports for individuals transition back into society, including behavioral health counseling. This effort will bring down costs, reduce recidivism and improve public safety." Charlie Baker agrees about the potential benefit of alternatives to incarceration, including treatment, of non-violent offenders, but is silent on the question of more prisons. Both candidates favor elimination of mandatory minimums for drug-related non-violent crimes.

#6. Martha Coakley has the passion to lead on gender-related issues and improving access to behavioral health care. Martha Coakley is clearly committed to addressing gender inequities at the workplace, protecting access to reproductive health and choice, and better addressing domestic violence. And she is equally committed to improving access to behavioral health care. Charlie Baker may not be far behind her on these issues, but they are Martha Coakley's passion, and that means they will be high priorities, and not get lost in a sea of other agenda items.

#7. Charlie Baker is a health care demagogue. On health care, where you might hope he would excel, Charlie Baker offers the same tired -- and misleading -- rhetoric about controlling costs by giving consumers more and better cost information upon which to make their decisions. First of all, the Commonwealth is already pursuing that path with the implementation of http://www.getthedealoncare.org/ pursuant to the Massachusetts Health Care Cost Containment law, Chapter 224 of the Acts of 2012. But realistically, does anyone expect to control health care costs by asking consumers -- people like you or me who need medical care to resolve a health problem -- to put lower cost ahead of greater reliability or quality when we shop around for care? Do we as individual consumers have the leverage to bargain down providers? When we have an urgent need for care, are we really going to shop around? Are residents of less well-served regions of the state going to seek care halfway across the Commonwealth to save their insurers a few dollars? Or, is Charlie Baker suggesting that the best way to save money is to force consumers to pay more of the cost of their care out of pocket? Health care relationships are based on trust; Making a decision about where to access treatment is not like figuring out which outlet has the cheapest pair of name brand jeans. What we need is the kind of cost containment with incentives for quality that is part of the financing initiatives in Obamacare ... which Charlie Baker wants to make Massachusetts exempt from (although he puts the blame on the website). What we really need is single payer, but with Don Berwick off the ballot, there won't be anyone in the corner office championing the best option.

Did Martha Coakley hand Partners a win in her effort to demonstrate competence on the health care front during the battle for the Democratic nomination? Probably. Is she more likely to advocate for consumers than the industry, given her background and experience as the Attorney General. I believe so. I give the advantage to Coakley on this issue, because good intentions matter more than expertise put to use to protect the wrong interests.

#8. On Gun control, I give the nod to Martha Coakley, because she didn't choose a running mate with 100% ratings from the NRA and the Gun Owners' Action League. Both Martha Coakley and Charlie Baker have come out in favor of gun control (although in a nod to gun rights groups, Charlie Baker affirms his support for the Second Amendment; is he suggesting Martha Coakley opposes it?). On the other hand, Karyn Polito, Baker's running mate (a heartbeat away from the corner office) has a 100% rating from the NRA and the Gun Owners' Action League. (Baker has discredited a SuperPAC ad by Coakley supporters claiming he opposed an assault weapons ban. http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/10/republican_charlie_baker_defen.html)

#9. On the environment, Martha Coakley gets the nod, for her opposition to the Kinder Morgan natural gas pipeline in Western Mass., an issue on which Baker has failed to take a public stand on. Both candidates understand the need for action to address climate change, and both have stated commitment to pursuing alternative energy sources and lower emission technologies.

#10. On affordable housing and homelessness, I give the nod to Martha Coakley for showing up at the CHAPA Forum at Faneuil Hall in September, and for pledging to increase funding for State Public Housing and for the Mass. Rental Voucher Program (MRVP), which is currently funded at half of the 1990 level. Charlie Baker didn't show up. (Attending were Democrats Berwick, Coakley, and Grossman; Republican Fisher; and independents Falchuk and McCormick). Coakley's platform on housing and homelessness focuses primarily on her excellent work on addressing foreclosures, but pretty much ignores the shortage of affordable rental housing and homelessness. Charlie Baker has little to say about affordable housing, but has given considerable thought to the problem and costs to the Commonwealth of family homelessness, and he deserves credit for that. Given the historic failure of short-term fixes, and the demonstrated need among so many families for extended housing assistance, Charlie Baker's failure to include increased funding for MRVP subsidies is a glaring and serious omission from that otherwise thoughtful effort.

=============

Attorney General: Maura Healey

• Healey has seven years experience in the AG office, including leadership positions as a division and bureau chief; she has had leadership roles in taking on the banking industry (initiating fair housing lawsuits, taking on subprime lenders for their predatory practices, and overseeing the first-in-the-nation HomeCorps program to keep families in their homes and stop unwarranted foreclosures), supporting marriage equality (opposing DOMA), and defending access to women's health care. Miller has private practice experience and expertise in economic infrastructure, but none of the experience on public sector issues that Healey would bring to the job.
• Healey understands the predatory nature of the casino gambling industry, supports repeal of the expanded gambling law, and has promised strict enforcement if voters reject Question 3 and allow the casino industry to come into Mass. As detailed in her website, Maura Healey understands the role of the AG and is equipped to lead the office in advancing the public's interest, in matters related to civil rights, criminal justice reform, disability rights, clean energy, consumer protection, enforcing workers' rights and protections, strengthening and enforcing gun laws, protecting college students from the predatory practices of for-profit schools, ensuring continued access to reproductive rights, protecting the rights of LGBTQ residents, addressing the epidemic of domestic and sexual violence including human trafficking, and ensuring access by veterans to the benefits and services that they are owed for their service.
• For more information about Maura Healey, check out her responses to the Progressive Mass. questionnaire.

============

Pat Jehlen and Denise Provost have long been outstanding advocates for our community and for progressive causes: affordable housing, environmental protection, quality education, fair and responsible taxes, single payer health care, decent wages and earned sick time, the rights of workers to organize, better public transportation (including Green Line Expansion), opposing expanded gambling, etc. Pat and Denise stand with Progressive Mass. on the ballot questions: No on 1; Yes on 2, 3, and 4. They deeply deserve to be returned to the State House -- and we need their voices there.

============

Christine Barber is running to fill the seat held by former State Rep. Carl Sciortino, who stepped down earlier this year to lead AIDS Action. She is by far the most qualified candidate in the race. Christine is running against Nick Lanzilli, who grew up in Medford and a 2012 graduate of UMass Amherst, who is running as an independent.

Christine has crucial State House experience: she was a member of the staff of the Health Care Committee that drafted the pioneering Mass. law that implemented near-universal access to health care. For the past seven years, she has served as a Senior Policy Analyst at Community Catalyst, working to organize and sustain a powerful consumer voice in the shaping of local, state and national decisions related to health and health care.

Christine's multi-issue policy platform reflects her broad understanding of the diverse array of issues and topics -- education, criminal justice, transportation, health access and financing, housing, economic development, etc. -- that a State Rep needs to address, and the strong progressive values that she would bring to the job. Christine's position on the ballot initiatives lines up with mine (No on 1; Yes on 2, 3, and 4). Lanzilli's brief platform statement reflects his lack of experience with the issues; his website does not indicate his position on the ballot questions.

Both candidates have been endorsed by the Mayors and Aldermen/Councilors/School Committee members from their respective cities. Both candidates have union endorsements. Christine has been endorsed by a host of environmental organizations and progressive political organizations, including Progressive Democrats of Somerville, Progressive Massachusetts, Medford for Mass., and Cambridge-Somerville for Change, as well as by State Sen. Pat Jehlen, State Rep. Denise Provost, and Cong. Katherine Clark.

Christine has been actively involved in the Somerville community for as long as I have known her, advocating for the Green Line extension, active with the Somerville Community Corporation's efforts on behalf of affordable housing and responsible development, providing leadership with the Progressive Democrats of Somerville (PDS) on the campaigns of Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markety and on local campaigns and (including my run for Alderman at Large a number of years ago, and her own campaign to be the Ward 4 Alderman. Incidentally, Tony LaFuente, who won the Ward 4 election, is now among her supporters in this State Rep race, which speaks to the character of both.)

For more information, visit the two candidate's websites (Christine Barber, Nick Lanzilli), read Christine's response to questions from the Somerville Times, read the candidates' statements on the issues from the Medford Transcripts, read the Boston Globe write-up on the race, read Christine's response to a PDS questionnaire (no other candidates responded).

or access here: http://tinyurl.com/mbkzmtx


 

POLITICO Massachusetts Playbook: STORM disruptions — GATES nixes Boston trip — Another DA retires

MASSACHUSETTS SHOULD IMPLEMENT A STATUTE REQUIRING EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE TO TAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION - THEN WE'D SEE HOW QUICKLY THE GRIDLOCK AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GETS CORRECTED.


GOVERNOR BAKER PRESIDED OVER THE MASSIVE FAILURE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN 2015, PROMISED TO CORRECT IT.......WE'RE STILL WAITING!

NOT ONLY WERE FARES RAISED AND NIGHT SERVICE ELIMINATED, BUT CHARLIE APPOINTED OVERPAID INCOMPETENTS FOCUSED MORE ON PRIVATIZATION AND NONSENSE THAN MAKING THE SYSTEM WORK TO SERVE THE PUBLIC.

RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION, CHARLIE BAKER ESTABLISHED A TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION THAT EXCLUDES THE SOUTH COAST, ANNOUNCED HIS 'BIG DIG' FOLLY

CHARLIE BAKER'S $935 MILLION BIG DIG!

CHARLIE BAKER CANCELLED FUNDING FOR THE MIDDLEBORO ROTARY, A COLOSSAL FAILURE AFFECTING 47,000 VEHICLES EACH DAY AND GRID LOCKING THE REGION. CHARLIE BAKER CANCELLED THE RESTORATION OF THE HISTORIC  TAUNTON SUPERIOR COURT HOUSE AND MUCH ELSE. 

CHARLIE BAKER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DOWNGRADING OF MASSACHUSETTS AND THE DOWNGRADING OF MASSACHUSETTS' BOND RATING THAT WILL COST TAXPAYER DOLLARS. 

AND THE MEDIA CONTINUES TO GIVE HIM A PASS? EVEN LOUDMOUTHED HOWIE CARR CAN'T SEEM TO MUSTER THE COURAGE TO ADDRESS CHARLIE BAKER'S NUMEROUS FAILURES. 

POLITICO Massachusetts Playbook: STORM disruptions — GATES nixes Boston trip — Another DA retires

Jay Gonzalez planned to travel from Gov. Charlie Baker's neighborhood in Swampscott to the State House to highlight the importance of public transportation. Gonzalez planned a similar transit experience during the last major winter storm in the beginning of January to highlight Baker's shortcomings on the transit system - and experienced an uncontroversial smooth ride.

This time, Gonzalez is skipping the trip, citing the weather event that's expected to be even worse than the January storm and postponing until Monday.

And in case you needed any other indication this nor'easter storm is serious: legendary meteorologist Jim Cantore will broadcast from Scituate this morning.

WHERE IS CHARLIE BAKER ON THIS DOR FAILURE?

- "Revenue Dept. failed to deliver timely child support payments," by Michael Levenson and Joshua Miller, Boston Globe: "The state Department of Revenue, already under fire for a data breach of sensitive tax information, acknowledged Thursday that it has failed to deliver timely child support payments to about 1,500 parents in Massachusetts since the beginning of the year. Revenue officials blamed the problem on a faulty computer system implemented in January and said it affected only a tiny percentage of the state's 160,000 child support recipients."

- "Feds say Boston's sanctuary city policy is 'serious risk'," by Dan Atkinson, Boston Herald: "Federal officials asked Boston police to detain 68 suspected illegal immigrants last year, a 353 percent increase over 2016 that has an advocacy group seething - but the feds are blasting the city for not honoring any of the detainment requests and letting numerous 'criminal aliens' out on bail. Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice, said it was unclear if any of the 68 people posed a threat to the community and slammed the increase in detainers as federal fearmongering."

AS GOVERNOR, CHARLIE BAKER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATE POLICE. WHERE'S CHARLIE BAKER'S OVERSIGHT?

THE LOCAL ANGLE -

- "Trooper involved in shooting has history of racist online posts," by Evan Allen and Andrea Estes, Boston Globe: "The Massachusetts State Police trooper who fired his rifle during a police confrontation in which a Cape Verdean ATV driver was injured in Boston on Saturday has a long history of posting racist and profane comments on a website called MassCops, including some in support of police officers who shoot suspects. State Police spokesman David Procopio said in a statement that the department has opened an 'immediate investigation' into the posts."

After 2010, Charlie Baker’s business options rich with complications

By Stephanie Ebbert and Beth Healy

| Globe Staff October 26, 2014

 

 

John Tlumacki/Globe Staff

After the disappointing end to his gubernatorial bid in 2010, Charlie Baker hugged his running mate, Richard Tisei, at their election night party.

It was early 2011, and Charlie Baker’s dream of becoming governor had just been dashed. He was starting over at 54 years old.

 

The whiz kid of Governor William Weld’s administration who later took the helm of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, and steered it back from the brink of financial ruin, had stepped away from his high-paying private-sector career and gambled it all on politics.

 

“There wasn’t a plan B,” Baker said recently. “I hadn’t thought about what would happen after the campaign if I lost.”

 

He had, however, thought about what he didn’t want. He had spent years grappling with big bureaucracies in challenging, even unpleasant, jobs that he recalls in flashbacks tinged with regret — the missed family dinners and kids’ sporting events, the innovations he couldn’t prod out of a sprawling organization, even as chief executive. The word he uses to describe his high-pressure work at both Harvard Pilgrim and on Beacon Hill: “icky.”

 

What had excited him most on the campaign trail were his interactions with small business owners. Rather than take another CEO position, he was attracted to an offer from a venture capital firm working with startups.

 

 

By teaming up with General Catalyst Partners, at the suggestion of cofounder Joel Cutler, Baker could become its in-house health-care expert, helping identify entrepreneurs for the firm to invest in, and sometimes he would invest as well.

 

“It just seemed a lot more appealing than jumping back on the big rig that I’d been on, at that point, for almost 20 years,” Baker said in a wide-ranging interview with the Globe about his business experience since his last campaign.

 

Numerous opportunities would come Baker’s way to advise companies and serve on their boards — lucrative appointments that were less time-consuming than leading one large enterprise. A review of

 

Baker’s career over the past four years found he leveraged his connections in business and politics with ease, expanding his resume and his investment portfolio while he mulled his next run for office.

 

General Catalyst provided more than half of the $865,000 he earned last year, according to his tax returns. Separately, he made hundreds of thousands of dollars sitting on the boards of two high-profile Massachusetts companies led by businessmen in his circles.

 

In one case, Baker was paid $180,000 a year to attend six meetings of the mutual fund board of Natixis Global Asset Management, a Boston company run by John Hailer, a relative by marriage.

 

In the other, he was offered more than $150,000 a year to serve on the board of publicly traded athenahealth Inc., a fast-growing company that won a $9.5 million state tax credit in exchange for the promise of nearly tripling employment and dramatically expanding its Watertown campus.

 

At the same time, Baker was invited to invest in a private real estate project with athenahealth’s exuberant CEO, Jonathan Bush, a first cousin of former president George W. Bush.

 

Jonathan Bush had a grand vision of transforming Watertown’s historic Arsenal section into a new tech corridor combining the best of Kendall Square and Brooklyn’s Williamsburg, with restaurants, shops and thousands of young high-tech workers. His redevelopment of the adjacent Arsenal Mall property would create an appealing live-work playground for the new employees athenahealth recruited.

 

While the mall redevelopment is legally separate from athenahealth’s project, their fortunes are deeply entwined — a point Bush acknowledged.

 

“I have this beautiful symphony of self-interest,” he told the Globe.

 

Baker, however, bristled at questions about his investment in the mall project, saying it had nothing to do with the expansion of the company where he was a director until last December . He said he had merely responded to a “boilerplate” solicitation to invest in a real estate opportunity.

 

“The Bakers have a sort of long list of things we’ve invested in. Some successfully, some not so,” he said.

General Catalyst

Baker dove into the world of venture capital at General Catalyst in March 2011, agreeing to become an executive-in-residence — a consulting position that would pay him to help startups in which the venture firm invested.

 

In his three years there, he worked closely with three companies, traveling to meet with their executives, sitting on their boards of directors, and serving as a sounding board as they made plans to grow and attract more customers and revenue.

 

One was TearScience, a North Carolina company with a high-tech treatment for dry-eye disease, in which General Catalyst had invested before Baker arrived.

 

“He provided solid business guidance to TearScience,” cofounder Tim Willis said in a statement, “as well as to me as CEO of the company.”

 

Another was Oceans Healthcare in Louisiana, which runs psychiatric facilities for geriatric patients.

 

“It’s a really cool company,” Baker said. “It’s doing really important work.” And it has a place close to his heart, he said — beating his chest three times with his fist — because his mother has Alzheimer’s disease. “I care a lot about geriatric psych.”

 

Because he was not a partner in General Catalyst, Baker did not earn the kind of profits that his colleagues would reap.

 

However, he did have a direct hand in the Oceans deal, recommending that General Catalyst invest.

 

The firm agreed, putting in $17 million, and Baker invested an undisclosed amount personally as well. Baker could earn profits on that investment in addition to the $150,000 he was paid last year to serve on the company’s board.

 

He becomes most excited when he talks about a third startup he advised for General Catalyst, Oscar Insurance, which appealed to the health care wonk in him. Oscar, based in New York, markets health plans directly to consumers with a website that tries to simplify the process.

 

Kevin Nazemi, co-CEO of the company, declined to be interviewed but in a statement said Baker “has made invaluable contributions as a board member to the building and scaling of Oscar.”

 

Baker describes his experience at Oscar as a stark contrast to the frustrations he had endured at giant Harvard Pilgrim.

 

Citing an industry health questionnaire that insurers have to beg patients to complete, Baker mocked its name, “health risk assessment,” as “the stupidest term in health care.” Oscar’s entrepreneurs didn’t even recognize it, he said.

 

Instead, Oscar developed an incentive program called “10 for 10” that paid consumers $10 for every 10 questions they answered about their health.

 

Baker dubbed it “gorgeous.” Its success rate: “friggin’ awesome.”

 

His work with Oscar gave him a chance to “totally get my ya-yas out of my system on all the projects of all the things that I ever wanted to do with a consumer-directed health plan.”

 

Yet for an executive so captivated by the minutiae of consumer questionnaires, Baker can be surprisingly cavalier about the fine print of his own business affairs.

 

The month after he joined General Catalyst, Baker misstated his job title when he contributed $10,000 at a GOP fund-raiser held by New Jersey’s governor, Chris Christie, in Boston. Baker identified himself as a “partner” of General Catalyst, though his job was executive-in-residence.

 

It was sloppy shorthand that would generate ethical questions for both his firm and his campaign.

 

Later that year, New Jersey invested $15 million in one of General Catalyst’s venture funds.

 

Questions arose last spring about whether Baker’s Christie donation violated New Jersey’s pay-to-play rules, which bar financial executives from making contributions that could influence politicians to direct money to their firms. The New Jersey state treasurer’s office opened an investigation of the matter; it remains ongoing.

 

Baker maintained that the pay-to-play regulations did not apply to him, because he was neither a decision maker at General Catalyst nor a registered investment professional. Though he made some recommendations about companies General Catalyst should invest in, he was not in charge of investment decisions.

 

He later said it was an error to have identified himself as a partner.

 

“I’m not part of the management hierarchy,” he said of his role at General Catalyst. “I’m not part of the team. I’m not even an employee.”

 

Yet his business relationship with General Catalyst is not as distant as he makes it sound.

 

To invest in a project with the partners, Baker created a separate investment vehicle with the principals of General Catalyst. He called it Baker’s Dozen, and listed five General Catalyst executives, including Cutler, as co-managers. (Baker later renamed the company CBDI Partners, in a twist on his initials, after deciding Baker’s Dozen was a “stupid name.”)

 

His payments from General Catalyst come through CBDI Partners. Any profits on the Oceans investment also would be paid through CBDI, he said.

 

General Catalyst declined to comment for this story. Baker took leave from the firm in August. For the second time, he gambled that his next career move could make him CEO of Massachusetts.

Natixis

Given the reputation he’d built among Boston business people for turning around Harvard Pilgrim, Baker was asked to serve on the boards of a variety of companies, from medical to financial.

 

“He has an unbelievably terrific ability to net things out, to get through the noise and focus on important things,’’ said Nancy Brown, a former executive of MedVentive Inc., a Waltham maker of software for physician groups. She invited him to sit on the board because of his experience in health care and for his “no-nonsense” approach.

 

“Charlie is a true manager,’’ she said. “People forget that governors need to know how to manage.”

 

One of the more challenging boards Baker joined was that of Tremont Credit Union, a struggling community institution in Boston. State banking regulators had sanctioned Tremont in 2010 for serious issues, including poor supervision that allowed risky lending practices and “instances of self-dealing and insider abuse by officers.”

 

The board was tasked with hiring a permanent chief executive but did not do so on Baker’s watch.

 

“They’re better,’’ Baker said. “But it’s hard to fix stuff.”

 

Baker’s longest term board appointment was at Natixis, a Boston investment group owned by a French bank. Natixis is one of the world’s largest investment firms and the parent of more than 20 brands, like the Boston bond firm Loomis, Sayles & Co.

 

Natixis is run by John Hailer, whose sister is married to Baker’s brother. Baker calls him his “brother-in-law,” though he says he only saw him at “two or three family gatherings” over the years. In 2009, the two overlapped at the New England Council, a Boston-based lobbying and policy group for business, when Baker was chairman and Hailer was vice chairman.

 

Baker said he did not know whether Hailer had recommended him to the Natixis board back in 2005.

 

Both Baker and Sandra Moose, chairwoman of the Natixis funds, recalled him being brought in by board member Graham Allison.

 

Moose said she had no recollection of Hailer putting Baker’s name in the hat.

 

“I had no idea that Charlie’s brother was married to John’s sister,’’ she said.

 

Baker had served on Natixis’ mutual fund board as a trustee paid to oversee the interests of shareholders from 2005 through 2009. He left for his first gubernatorial campaign, and returned in January 2011.

 

That same month, Natixis made a large settlement in a lawsuit with a married, high-ranking saleswoman who alleged sexual harassment and discrimination by the CEO. The woman said she was fired months after she rebuffed Hailer’s sexual advances — and the day after she told human resources she was pregnant with her second child.

 

Baker said he was not aware of the settlement and it was never disclosed to the mutual fund board. Hailer, who also is a member of the mutual fund board, declined to comment.

 

“This is the first time I’ve ever heard about it,” Baker said. In a recent interview, Moose, too, said the board was not informed.

 

In a statement, Natixis said it handled the matter internally and informed its corporate board of directors in France. It said that fund trustees are not responsible for company operations or employee issues, and that Baker was on leave from the board during the discovery work in the lawsuit.

 

“We took this complaint seriously and ultimately agreed to settle this matter in early 2011 to avoid further costs and distractions of litigation,’’ the company said. “We followed rigorous governance and reporting processes — our corporate board chairman, all corporate board members, and the corporate audit committee were aware of the matter throughout.”

 

But several lawyers and specialists in the workings of mutual fund boards said the company should have told the fund trustees because the matter was so closely tied to the company’s integrity, working conditions, and ability to attract talent.

 

Arthur Levitt, a former chairman of the federal Securities and Exchange Commission who advocates for better mutual fund governance, said that in a case such as this, the company should “absolutely” have informed the board about the settlement.

 

“There’s no question that I think that should be revealed to the other board members,’’ Levitt told the Globe. “The revelation is consistent with good governance.”

ATHENAHEALTH

The best known company where Baker held a board seat was athenahealth, a national leader in computerizing health care records. CEO Jonathan Bush had crossed paths with Baker in the health care world and became a major fund-raiser for his campaign in 2010.

 

“I’m a huge Charlie Baker fan,” Bush said in an interview. “I pinched myself when I got him to join the board.”

 

Baker was a guy after Bush’s own heart — fiscally conservative and socially moderate. He was a respected manager, a master of high finance during the Big Dig years and when Harvard Pilgrim was in receivership. Bush invited Baker to join the board in June 2012.

 

Over the next 13 months, Baker would have a front-row seat to a flurry of activity, as athenahealth would ink a $168.5 million real estate transaction, acquiring the historic Arsenal on the Charles property where it had been renting its headquarters from Harvard University.

 

That same month, in December 2012, athenahealth notified state and local officials it would seek a tax credit in exchange for creating 1,900 new jobs within a decade. The tax credit push was led by Dan Haley, athenahealth’s vice president of government and regulatory affairs, and one of four Baker campaign aides hired by the company.

 

Two months later, Bush approached board members, including Baker, inviting them to invest in the Arsenal Mall property down the block.

 

Baker was one of about 50 people who bought in, investing $250,000. Other athenahealth directors also invested, though Bush declined to say which ones.

 

“I found anybody who looked remotely rich,’’ Bush recalled. “Two days later, I was oversubscribed.”

 

Baker’s investment was perfectly legal. And neither he nor the board thought it needed to be disclosed to athenahealth stockholders. Directors primarily disclose relationships with a company when they are selling something, like legal services.

 

But in the case of athenahealth, matters could arise that could impact both developments — for example, improvements to the property that could also work to benefit Baker and other investors with a stake in the mall project.

 

An athenahealth spokeswoman said the company “will review situations in the future on a case-by-case basis, as to whether there are conflicts, in the event of any transaction between athenahealth and the mall development.’’

 

Regulators do not require public companies to disclose all board relationships, noted Jill E. Fisch, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School in Philadelphia. But some relationships can raise questions about independence, Fisch said. “It’s the job of the board to decide if the director can be independent.”

 

Baker, a member of athenahealth’s audit committee, said he never gave any thought to whether his mall investment might benefit from the tax break, or the growth of the company.

 

“Nope. Nope,” he said, his tone frustrated. “It never occurred to me.

 

“That would mean that everyone who’s an investor in that real estate investment would somehow be a beneficiary.”

 

Baker took offense when asked whether, as a veteran of state government, he had helped advise the company on securing the tax credit. “No!” he said angrily.

 

He suggested he was so far removed from the tax credit decision process that he never learned of its outcome or its value — although he was on the board at the time and his name appears on athenahealth’s application for the tax break.

 

So far, Baker hasn’t made money on the investment, recording a $100,785 loss on his taxes last year. But he expects to eventually earn a profit.

 

“I mean, that is going to be a growth area. It just is,” he said.

More gubernatorial coverage

• Where the candidates stand on the issues
• In-depth Q&As with the candidates
• Quietly, Martha Coakley’s husband buttresses her efforts
• This time around, Baker’s wife steps into foreground
• Adrian Walker: Not the AG we know
• After 2010, Charlie Baker’s business options rich with complications
• Martha Coakley rebuilt her name, raising questions among critics
• Charlie Baker jumps to 9 point lead in new Globe poll
• Dante Ramos: Charlie Baker struggles as Martha Coakley finds her zone
• Joanna Weiss: Charlie Baker’s tightrope
• More from Capital: The week in politics and issues

 

 

 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/10/25/after-baker-had-business-options-rich-with-potential-and-complications/NDhFN29iSivcXWgpjyIqlO/story.html

 

 

POLITICO Massachusetts Playbook: WARREN’s strong Q1 — WYNNing Boston — KENNEDY heads to New Hampshire

POLITICO Massachusetts Playbook: WARREN’s strong Q1 — WYNNing Boston — KENNEDY heads to New Hampshire

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN'S GRASSROOTS SUPPORT:

WARREN'S STRONG Q1 - Sen. Elizabeth Warren notched another significant fundraising quarter, raising $3.12 million in the first three months of 2018, according to new numbers released by her campaign this morning. This leaves her with $15 million cash on hand as of the end of March.

Of those donations, 10,422 came from Massachusetts. The vast majority, 82 percent, came in the form of $25 of less. Only one percent of the contributions donations were larger than $100.

Warren's fundraising prowess has made her one of the Senate's top fundraisers. She's far outpacing the Republican field as she seeks re-election.

THE MEDIA HAS PROVIDED A SLANTED PLATFORM FOR CHARLIE BAKER OR VOTERS ARE WOEFULLY UNINFORMED. 

CHARLIE BAKER'S POLITICAL HACKS HAVE CAUSED SCANDALS GALORE WHILE CHARLIE BAKER MERELY WHINES CRITICISM. THAT'S NOT LEADERSHIP. EVEN DOR HAS FAILED AGAIN.

ONE MUST WONDER WHO THESE POLLSTERS CALL.

- "Poll: Mass. Gov. Charlie Baker remains nation's most popular governor," by Shira Schoenberg, MassLive.com: "Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker remains the most popular governor in America, according to a new poll by Morning Consult. The poll shows that Baker is in a strong position as he approaches the 2018 election, in which three Democrats - Setti Warren, Jay Gonzalez and Bob Massie - are challenging him."

- "Charlie Baker defended Vertex's high prices - a few weeks after his campaign cashed its checks," by Frank Phillips, Boston Globe: "As the public outcry mounts over drug companies charging astounding prices for their latest miracle medicines, Governor Charlie Baker - fresh off a fund-raising splurge from Vertex Pharmaceuticals officials - is going the other way. Baker appeared at a forum this week and gave a full-throated defense of the Boston-based firm for charging up to $300,000 annually per patient for its newly developed drugs to fight cystic fibrosis. Baker's aides were quick to push back at any notion there was a line between the donations and his justifying the cost of Vertex's drugs."

COULD IT BE CHARLIE BAKER'S INCOMPETENT POLITICAL HACKS FROM WELLESLY AGAIN?

- "Baker 'incredibly annoyed' by Revenue Dept. blunders," by Joshua Miller, Boston Globe: "A day after revelations of more data snafus at the beleaguered state Department of Revenue, Governor Charlie Baker said Thursday that he was 'incredibly annoyed' and 'incredibly frustrated' by the cavalcade of troubles at the tax-collecting agency. The department said Wednesday that the personal information of thousands of people who pay child support was inadvertently sent to companies that do not employ them, potentially revealing about 6,100 people's Social Security numbers and wage information to those who should not have seen them."

- "US Rep. Jim McGovern slams reported plan to drug test some food stamp recipients, says Donald Trump should be the one drug tested," by Shannon Young, MassLive.com: "U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Worcester, condemned the Trump administration Thursday for reportedly considering a proposal that would allow states to drug test certain food stamp recipients -- a policy which he called 'insulting and unconscionable.' McGovern, who has dedicated much of his work in Washington to fighting hunger, said he thinks it's an "awful idea" to require even some of those benefitting from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- known as food stamps -- to pass drug tests, arguing that it promotes an inaccurate stereotype that most people on public assistance use drugs."

CLICK ON LINK FOR MORE OR SUBSCRIBE FOR YOURSELF FOR FREE!

 

CHARLIE BAKER FLUNKS! LET'S MAKE HIM ONE & DONE!

Charlie Baker is running for re-election and misspending taxpayer dollars without results. 
Overpaid incompetents can't keep trains running on time or safely.

Now Charlie blames others --- Sorry Charlie! You own it!  

SouthCoast Rail service to Boston could start in 2022 or Charlie Baker's $935 MILLION Brain Fart!

One of the biggest details revealed includes a $935 million price tag in a five-year capital plan.  

MassDOT + $1 BILLION FOLLY!

Selectwoman Diane Stewart expressed frustration about the state prioritizing South Coast Rail over unresolved traffic congestion at the Route 44 rotary. She said a rotary flyover would affect 47,000 cars each day, far more than the train station, for far less money than has already been spent planning the Stoughton commuter line.

“I have a problem with that,” she said.

Jean Fox, project manager for South Coast Rail, said DOT has looked at preliminary engineering with regard to traffic and is awaiting a full study.

NO STUDY CURRENTLY EXISTS! PLANNING WAS DONE WITHOUT FACTS.

Service through Middleboro is estimated to cost $1.1 billion, including some of the work necessary for Stoughton service. The Stoughton route, with costlier electric trains, is estimated at $3.3 billion.

DAY LATE CHARLIE ONCE AGAIN! 

ON YOUR WATCH CHARLIE - YOU OWN IT! 

- "Baker 'extremely disappointed' with data breach at revenue department," by Joshua Miller, Boston Globe: " Governor Charlie Baker said he is 'extremely disappointed' with a Department of Revenue data breach that made private information from about 39,000 business taxpayers visible to other companies, potentially including competitors. He said the intent of what the tax-collecting agency was originally pursuing with the change that lead to the breach - allowing its tax agents to better help businesses with questions about withholding - was positive."

MUST READ!

MORE PHONY PROMISES BY DAY LATE CHARLIE WHO CAN'T EVEN KEEP THE MBTA RUNNING, NEVER MIND HIS BOGUS SOUTH COAST RAIL. UP FOR RE-ELECTION CHARLIE FINALLY WOKE UP?

FORMER GOVERNOR DEVAL PATRICK AND THE LEGISLATURE APPROVED FUNDING FOR THE MIDDLEBORO ROTARY THAT PUTS THE REGION IN GRIDLOCK....CHARLIE CANCELLED IT! 

THANKS CHARLIE! 

Transit issues could help, haunt Gov. Baker's election hopes

Credit: Patrick Whittemore

Associated Press Saturday, February 24, 2018

BOSTON — For Gov. Charlie Baker, public transportation could be a path to victory or road to ruin in the November election.

The Republican has staked much of his reputation as a Mr. Fix-It technocrat on dragging the metropolitan Boston area's creaking subway, bus and commuter rail system into the 21st century.

It was a job thrust upon him just weeks after he was sworn in when a series of brutal snowstorms in 2015 dumped several feet of snow in the area, exposing every weakness in the public transit network, including the nation's oldest subway system.

Despite efforts to modernize the subway, there are occasional reminders of how daunting the task is.

One of those reminders came Wednesday when a train motor failed on Boston's Red Line, causing the train to derail during the morning commute. Unnerved passengers said the train bounced on the tracks, causing a window to break and spray glass. No passengers were hurt.

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority officials said about 300 feet of track was damaged.  Service was restored about 8 hours later. 

Democrats hoping to unseat Baker in November seized on the accident as evidence that the Republican isn't working hard enough to meet his promise to keep the MBTA running smoothly.

"It used to be a joke how old the trains on the #MBTA were, now peoples lives are seriously in danger," Robert Massie, an environmental activist, tweeted. "This is no joke — it's time to modernize our rail system and bring it under the control and oversight of the state."

Jay Gonzalez, a budget official under former Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick, also took to Twitter to quip: "Charlie Baker: 'Elect me, I'm a great manager!' Red Line riders: 'Every one in three trips is a nightmare on the T.'"

A third Democratic candidate, former Newton Mayor Setti Warren, also pointed a finger at Baker, calling the derailment "further evidence that Gov. Baker is failing and his strategy of no new revenue and privatization is wrong."

Baker said fixing all that ails the MBTA is no small task — but one he's already dug into, even as he called Wednesday's breakdown "unacceptable."

"For decades, people neglected making the investments they should have been making on the core systems. We have been investing hundreds of millions of dollars on those core system upgrades," Baker told reporters Thursday.

WE'RE SUPPOSED TO WAIT 'A COUPLE OF YEARS' ?

"In a couple of years from now you're going to have basically new cars on the Red Line, new cars on the Orange Line, new signals and switches on both systems, new cars and a very different system than the one you have now," Baker added.

Baker's transportation promises go beyond shaping up subway lines.

He's pressing ahead with a plan for a long-sought-after South Coast commuter rail line from Boston to New Bedford and Fall River, something his predecessors had also promised with little to show.

On Jan. 31, the state Department of Transportation flied a draft environmental impact report on the project, another step toward actual construction.

With the filing, Baker said his administration is "committed to following through on decades of promises," adding that the filing "is a vital step toward bringing reliable, affordable rail service to the South Coast."

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_politics/2018/02/transit_issues_could_help_haunt_gov_bakers_election_hopes