"Patrick campaigns for Coakley, and for his own legacy" by Michael Levenson | Globe Staff September 27, 2014
When Deval Patrick ran for governor in 2006 and Republicans were accusing him of being soft on crime, he turned to an unlikely ally to bail him out: Martha Coakley, then the Middlesex district attorney and candidate for attorney general.
The two had almost no personal relationship — Coakley had endorsed Patrick’s rival in the Democratic primary — but she appeared in an ad for the political newcomer, defending him as tough on crime and criticizing his Republican foe.
Now, eight years later, Coakley is turning to Patrick for help, hoping the popular two-term governor — widely considered one of the best campaigners the state has seen — can mobilize his grass-roots supporters one last time as she tries to defeat Patrick’s rival from the 2010 governor’s race, Charlie Baker.
In answering her call, Patrick is not only repaying a political debt, but fighting for his own legacy.
And to keep a lid on the corruption and failure of one-party government and his terms.
Coakley is running to extend Patrick’s agenda on education, transportation, and other issues, while Baker — much as he did four years ago — is targeting Patrick’s record as part of his promise of change.
That is not going to help. I will soon explain.
Democrats say if Patrick were ever to run for the White House, it would also help to have a friend in the governor’s office, putting a gloss on his tenure, rather than a former foe probing for management problems and steering the state in a different direction.
Yup, it's all about imagery and illusion.
Forget the state drug lab scandal, the DCF scandal, the meningitis murders, the failed modernization of state websites, the billion borrowed to throw at already-profitable biotech, and on and on. He's served wealth and partied with the political cla$$ and that is about it.
That's not the narrative coming from that crowd, though. He must be very controllable to be mentioned for higher office. What dark things with which can Deval be blackmailed?
************
Democratic Party leaders said the most important role Patrick can play is helping Coakley, who has been criticized as a sometimes lackluster campaigner, energize African-Americans, Latinos, and the vast army of volunteers who propelled the governor to an improbable victory in 2006 and then helped him win reelection.
This week in Great Barrington, Patrick held the first in a series of “Friends of Deval” celebrations to thank his diehard supporters and urge them to join Coakley’s campaign. About 150 people showed up, according to John Walsh, the executive director of Patrick’s political action committee. On Sunday, Patrick plans to attend a “statewide volunteer summit” with Coakley in Worcester.
That's not going to be enough votes.
“There are people who are very loyal to Deval and I think he can motivate them,” said Kate Donaghue, a longtime party activist from Westborough and member of the Democratic National Committee. “Martha is an outstanding leader, but her role has been a little different than Deval’s and, I think, working together, they can inspire people.”
Can we get away from the damn personality worship for a while?
Coakley, however, has to be careful not to appear as though she is running for a third Patrick term, said Mo Cowan, Patrick’s former chief of staff, whom the governor appointed to a brief term in the US Senate. Cowan said Coakley and Baker face a “Deval Patrick problem,” as they try to establish distinct messages and platforms.
Why not if he's so great?
You know what Mo is up to now?
“Each faces challenges campaigning to succeed a very popular sitting governor,” he wrote in an e-mail to the Globe. “Charlie has to be careful because he needs Democrats and independents; 2010 taught him that he cannot win trashing the governor’s record. Martha has to both embrace the current administration and explain how and where her administration will differ.” Why not? It's a terrible record no matter how you spin it.
Believe, I didn't want it to end this way. I voted him in the first time.
Patrick and Coakley do not have a deep political or personal bond, but their careers have crossed paths at a few key moments. They also share a top political adviser, Doug Rubin.
**********
When Scott Brown stunned the political world and defeated Coakley in the US Senate race, Patrick said he made a point of standing behind Coakley on stage at the Sheraton Boston Hotel as she delivered her concession speech to a roomful of tearful, shaken Democrats.
And he will again!
“That’s what friends do,” Patrick said.
It remains an open question just how deeply involved and highly visible Patrick will be in Coakley’s campaign for governor.
When Patrick endorsed Warren Tolman for attorney general earlier this month, he waited until four days before the Democratic primary, after momentum had swung behind Tolman’s opponent, Maura Healey. Patrick also announced his endorsement in an e-mail and online video and never campaigned in person with Tolman.
Healey was a Coakley girl, too.
Since Coakley won the Democratic primary on Sept. 9, Patrick has appeared with her at least three times. He spoke at her victory party, at a unity event with the losing candidates, and in Quincy, where he promoted Coakley’s plans to expand prekindergarten programs — an initiative Patrick began but never completed....
Another failed legacy, and something to keep in mind for later.
Several Democrats said they see they see little risk for Patrick in putting his weight behind Coakley. No matter the result in November, they said, Patrick will remain an in-demand speaker at party gatherings and on behalf of candidates nationwide, prized for his oratorical skills.
Imagery, illusion, sigh.
“If she wins, he will properly get some credit, and, if she loses, he probably won’t get much blame,” said Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster based in Washington. “He’s been governor for two terms, and people are going to judge him on his own right and not by his successor.”
We have, and what an unbelievable mess he is leaving behind.
--more--"
Related: 3 Bridgewater guards fired after man’s death
That make things all better?
Peculiar firings hint at woes in Patrick’s justice policies
Related: Found My Guy For Governor
His mo$t la$ting legacy:
"Child poverty continues to climb in Mass.; Care, housing costs, job squeeze keep rate rising" by Katie Johnston | Globe Staff September 22, 2014
The persistent rise of child poverty in Massachusetts — confirmed by last week’s census figures for 2013 — is the result of costly day care and housing, the proliferation of low-wage jobs, and a labor market that can be difficult for young parents to break into, according to specialists in the field.
Just ignore all the wealth being sucked upward.
Nearly one in six children in Massachusetts was growing up in poverty as of last year, data from the US Census Bureau show; in households with single mothers, it was one in four.
Can you $ee why I am so ashamed of my home state?
Child poverty rose in the state even as it is dropping nationally. The numbers indicate many of the state’s most vulnerable residents have yet to benefit from a steadily improving regional economy.
Only the upper crust has.
“Work is not, for a lot of families, sufficient to lift people above poverty,” said Marybeth Mattingly, director of research on vulnerable families at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. Minimum-wage jobs with part-time hours and no benefits, for instance, often are not enough to live on.
After I have been told how great the recovery is and how we outpace the nation?!!
The poverty rate for children in Massachusetts increased more than three percentage points between 2009 and 2013 — to 16.3 percent — even as the reported unemployment rate declined.
That's because those who exhausted their unemployment "benefits(?)" are no longer counted.
Nationwide, the Census Bureau reported that child poverty declined for the first time since the economic collapse, although the rate is still higher than it was when the recession technically ended in 2009. Across the country, more than one in five children are still living in households with incomes below the poverty level.
It never ended for 95% of us.
Poverty has been slowly climbing in Massachusetts for the past five years (although specialists caution that each annual increase is not necessarily statistically significant), and children are being affected at a higher rate than the general population.
How can that be, and how can they say an impacted life is insignificant?
That is partly because parents with children under age 18 tend to make less money, said Laura Speer, associate director of policy reform and advocacy at the Annie E. Casey Foundation, a Baltimore philanthropy for at-risk children.
“They’re more likely to be younger, less likely to have experience, so they tend to have more difficulty in the labor market,” she said.
High housing and child-care expenses also contribute to the problem, specialists say. In Massachusetts, the annual cost for full-time infant child care is more than $16,000, according to Child Care Aware of America. That makes it the fourth-most-expensive state in the country for child care, and is roughly equivalent to the yearly pay of a full-time minimum-wage worker.
Look at all the excuses and rationales they come up with to explain away the greedy money grab from above.
Related: Rising costs of essential services straining the middle class
What middle class?
Young children who grow up in unstable homes or without enough to eat are subject to emotional and cognitive impairment, which can lead to poor performance in school and ultimately make it difficult for them to succeed in life, said Dianne Luby, executive director of Horizons for Homeless Children in Roxbury, which provides child care and early education for homeless children around the state.
“It can lead to another cycle of poverty,” Luby said.
The cycle of wealth has money being tossed at you from all directions.
Overall, the number of homeless family members in Massachusetts has increased by 81 percent in the past six years, the second-highest increase of any state in the nation, according to Horizons for Homeless Children.
We are almost number one in something you don't want to be number one.
******************************
Raising the minimum wage will ease, but not eradicate, the problem, observers say....
That's why it's getting such hot air from politicians, makes them look like they are doing something while continue to $erve their ma$ters.
The numbers look much different when they are broken down by race....
Except the race will be decided by gender, not class.
--more--"
Also see: Charlie Baker releases TV ad targeting Democrats
NEXT DAY UPDATE: ‘Why do you want to be governor?’
