Blogster's Miscellany: Thoughts on Markey v. Kennedy, Plush Pensions & More

Friday, August 7, 2020

MEANINGLESS MEASUREMENTS DEPT.  The Boston Globe recently devoted just under 100 inches of type, plus a color photo and caption that spanned four columns and went four inches deep, to the campaign tempest over how much time U.S. Senator Ed Markey spends in Massachusetts versus Washington, D.C.  Headline: "Markey was least likely legislator to be in Mass." 

After reviewing travel records for all members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation, the Globe revealed that Markey stayed in Massachusetts on 38% of the nights between June 1, 2018, and May 31, 2020, whereas his opponent in the September 1 Democratic primary, U.S. Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy, III, spent 70% of those nights here. "Senator Markey isn't here enough.  He isn't in Massachusetts enough," Kennedy complains.  The article pointed out that, for every local official in the state who says Markey is never around, there is another who "says he is an engaged and present politician."  Where a member of congress bunks is a bogus metric -- and never more than in the era of the coronavirus and video meetings via electronics, i.e., Zoom, WebEx, et al.  And what about the carbon emissions resulting from all those congresspersons flying back and forth to Washington at the drop of a hat?  Enviros, why rush you not to Eddie's defense?

MORE MEANINGFUL MEASUREMENTS DEPT.  I miss President Obama as much as the next guy from Massachusetts.  That does not mean I agreed with everything he said and did -- or did not do.  I still shake my head over the time he was at the Gridiron Club event and dismissed the idea of socializing with the Senate Republican majority leader.  That day, in the middle of a very effective comedic routine, Obama told the audience of media bigshots, and friends of bigshots: "Some folks still don't think I spend enough time with Congress. 'Why don't you get a drink with Mitch McConnell?' they ask. 'Really? Why don't YOU get a drink with Mitch McConnell?"  How could someone as smart as Obama not see having a drink with the majority leader as a priority rather than a pointless chore?  This sets up a soapbox moment for me on the aforementioned Globe story...I believe a better measurement of congressional job performance than the number of nights spent at homes in their districts is how many times they have dinner in Washington with a member of the other party.

STATE PENSION WHIPPING BOY.  The Boston Herald published an article August 3 stating there are 1,540 retired state employees who "are set to earn six-figure payouts (of their pensions this year) as the state struggles mightily during the coronavirus pandemic, ["Massachusetts pensions keep bulging with state paying out $5.44B.  Herald analysis of state pension report shows slew of of six-figure earners."]   Here's the first paragraph of that article: "UMass retirees top the state's $5.44 billion pension system, with the university's former President William 'Billy' Bulger set to pocket nearly $272,000 this year, records show."  Bulger, who served as president of the Massachusetts Senate for 17 years before becoming president of UMass, is collecting the size pension allowed him under law.  Anyone else in his position would do the same.  That does not mean it is a good idea the state fails to put a cap on maximum earnings by state pensioners.  Something in the range of $5,000 to $6,000 a month ($60K-$72K per year) seems reasonable -- as well as prudent for a Commonwealth with so many unmet needs.  Perhaps the pandemic-related depression we're experiencing will create the social and political circumstances that will end, at some indistinct point in the future, six-figure pensions for future state retirees.   

FLEXIBILITY EQUALS LONGEVITY.  During a virtual U.S. senatorial campaign event on August 4 hosted by Suffolk University, the WGBH Forum Network and the Justice Reform Coalition, both Ed Markey and challenger Joe Kennedy supported: (a) ending prison sentences of life without parole, (b) decriminalizing sex work, and (c) giving incarcerated felons the right to vote.  When Markey was first elected to office 48 years ago, as a state rep from Malden, I strongly doubt he could have won if he'd espoused even one of those positions, never mind all three.  Today, I would bet, that Markey cannot win the September 1 Democratic primary if he does not to embrace all three...There's a huge difference between a race for rep in one or two communities and a statewide election for what is a national office.  The comparison is interesting but not apt.  So let's take the first time Markey was elected to the U.S. House from the old Seventh Massachusetts District, in 1976.  He won a very crowded, 12-person Democratic primary and then coasted to victory in the final. I covered that race as a newspaper reporter.  If Markey had made the mistake on the campaign trail then of even musing aloud on parole for lifers, lawful sex for hire, and inmate voting rights, the resulting controversy would have sunk his congressional candidacy; his 40-plus-year career in D.C. never would have happened.

ONE MAN'S BASE IS ANOTHER'S MAN'S MOB.  Talk about red meat!  Not long after the virtual U.S. senatorial campaign event hosted by Suffolk U., et al., the Massachusetts Republican Party issued a press release ripping Markey and Kennedy for their positions.  The headline on the release gives the complete flavor of the product: "Markey, Kennedy competing to see who can best placate the far-left mob."  Party chairman Jim Lyons, formerly a state rep from Andover, was quoted in the release as follows: "These dangerous proposals are where the Democrats are headed, and they're absolutely insane.  Both Sen. Markey and Rep. Kennedy will do anything and promise anything to pander to the far left mob that appears to be dictating the Democrat Party's policy platform."

IN A DESPERATE TIME, A NEEDED REMINDER.  Yesterday, Action for Boston Community Development issued a statement reminding us all how bad things are in our country at this moment -- and how much worse things may become if a new coronavirus relief law does not quickly emerge from the Congress and the office of the President.  ABCD points out that, when the emergency $600-per-week federal payment to every unemployed person expired seven days ago, on July 31, more than 950,000 Massachusetts were impacted, meaning that many families are now unable to meet their basic needs, and that, abruptly, there was a lot less money being spent in Massachusetts.  "...continuing delay in passage of a second virus relief bill leaves 30 million high and dry, running out of food and essential goods and fearing homelessness after the federal eviction moratorium ended July 25,"  ABCD noted. 


No comments:

Post a Comment