MA GOP Leader Embraces a Losing Trump, Ignores a Successful Baker

Monday, November 30, 2020

The Massachusetts Republican Party has been going through a rough patch for quite some time. 

Nothing that happened to the party on Nov. 3rd made things smoother.

Republicans lost one Senate seat and one House seat, meaning they will have only three senators out of 40, and 29 representatives out of 160 when the new legislature convenes in January.  Their membership in the upper branch will be at its lowest level since at least 1970, according to the State House News Service.

WBUR radio's Anthony Brooks pointed out in a Nov. 19 report: "The state GOP will enter the new year with a shrinking minority on Beacon Hill, no members in Congress and internal divisions that are forcing a reckoning."

"Internal divisions" was primarily a reference to the upcoming fight for Republican Party chairman, a position now held by former Andover rep Jim Lyons, whose heart beats fast at the mention of Donald Trump's name.  

Lyons's devotion to Trump puts him sideways with the most popular, most successful Republican in Massachusetts, Governor Charlie Baker, whose calm, cerebral, non-partisan approach to governing is the opposite of the president's. 

Trump has long made our guv uncomfortable.  Baker announced before the latest election he would not be voting for his party's national leader.

Shawn Dooley, a Republican rep from Norfolk, will run for chairman against Lyons at the next state GOP convention.  "Dooley faults the party," as Brooks put it, "for being too focused on Donald Trump instead of core Republican values like lower taxes, personal freedom and supporting the police amidst calls for reform."

There are also divisions within the current Republican party apparatus.  Tom Mountain, vice chairman of the party, moans that the GOP "got completely clobbered" on Nov. 3, while a paradoxically upbeat Lyons claims Trump "has energized a core of Republican voters who will help the party win elections in the future," according to the story filed by Brooks.    

Question: Why would Trump-generated energy help future Republican candidates in Massachusetts when it failed to do so on Nov. 3, as Trump collected 1,167,202 votes here (32.3%) ?  [Joe Biden won the support of 2,382,202 (65.9%) Massachusetts voters.]

Go to the homepage of the Republican party website, massgop.com, and you find a big picture of Trump, not Baker, the only thing standing between the party and oblivion in the Commonwealth. 

In the website's "About Us" section, it says, "We believe that free enterprise, low taxes, and fewer regulations are the best ways to grow our economy in order to create good, high-paying jobs across Massachusetts."

If Shawn Dooley displaces Jim Lyons, I'd urge him to come up with something different.  He should consider a party credo more in line with the popular, time-tested Baker model of governing and more appealing to independent voters, something along these lines:

"We believe in spending every tax dollar carefully, creating the smartest, most innovative state government possible, and serving as a much-needed counterweight to the Democratic Party."



 

Clark Rises Ever Higher in U.S. House and Easily Deflects 'Assassin' Talk

Sunday, November 29, 2020

Katherine Clark, a daughter of New Haven, Connecticut, a Cornell-educated lawyer, and the married mother of three sons, moved in 2001 with her family to the city where I have lived now for 42 years, Melrose, Massachusetts.

Within a year, Clark was elected to the Melrose School Committee, which made the locals sit up and take notice.  I didn't meet her until after she had taken office.  When I did -- at a community event at Memorial Hall, a stately granite building dedicated to the soldiers and sailors from Melrose who died in the Civil War -- I could see why she did well in her first try for political office.

She was tall and striking in the interesting but not perfect way that some models are.  She had an energy, a poise, a confidence about her that made her almost glow.  I talked with her for a minute or two and found it impossible not to like her.  It wasn't just her charisma.  It was her sincerity and obvious intelligence, and the gift she had for being fully present in the moment and at ease with herself.  I could see she was a born socializer, the kind of person most persons want to be friends with -- and to do things for.

In 2004, Clark, a Democrat, ran against, and lost to, Richard Tisei of Wakefield, the longtime incumbent Republican state senator for the district Melrose is in.  I have a good friend who was a big volunteer in her senate campaign from early on.  He invited and encouraged me to get onboard the campaign, as many, Melrosians were doing.  I politely declined because by then I had known and voted for Richard Tisei for two decades. I never had a beef with the way he conducted himself in the community and in the legislature.  Moreover, Richard and his staff were a big help to me and my former employer during the years (1984-98) I was in charge of public and community relations at the Melrose-Wakefield Hospital.  I would have been an ingrate to back Katherine over Richard.

Post-defeat, the irrepressible Clark brought her talents to statewide politics for the Democratic Party, and, in 2006, was appointed co-chair of Victory 2006, the party's campaign and fundraising unit that year.  When the Democratic nominee, Deval Patrick, won, Clark justifiably received part of the credit.  

A year later, Patrick appointed Mike Festa, then Melrose's state representative, Secretary of Elder Affairs.  Clark jumped into the race to succeed Festa through a required special election.  She defeated two Democrat opponents in the primary and prevailed over the Republican nominee in the final by 46 percentage points.  Two years later, she won a race for an open Senate seat in the legislature after Richard Tisei resigned to run for lieutenant governor. 

Clark had captured two open seats in a row in convincing fashion and soon she would make it three, dramatically upping her game in the process.

After Malden's Ed Markey won, in 2013, a special election to the U.S. Senate, taking the position John Kerry vacated upon becoming Barack Obama's Secretary of State, Clark became a candidate for Markey's Fifth District U.S. House seat.  In any state, winning an election for the U.S. House is infinitely more challenging than winning a race for the state legislature.  Clark proved herself more than worthy for the challenge.

Positioning herself as an equal rights champion who could best oppose Republicans at the Capitol in their "war against women," Clark beat six candidates in the Democratic primary, including two of her state senate colleagues, William Brownsberger of Belmont and Karen Spilka of Ashland, now president of the Massachusetts Senate; a state rep, Carl Sciortino of Somerville, and a former rep, Peter Koutoujian, the Sheriff of Middlesex County.  Beating Koutoujian was especially notable because his base of power in greater Waltham was larger than Clark's in Melrose/Wakefield, and he had run a successful race before in the state's largest county and was well-known to a much larger swath of the electorate than Clark was.  In the final, Clark easily defeated the Republican nominee, Frank Addivinola.

Let's jump ahead in the Clark chronology -- skipping over some promotions she has had -- to Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2020, when she was elected assistant speaker of the U.S. House in an internal Democratic election that pitted her against Rhode Island congressman David Cicilline, a Brown and a Georgetown Law grad, and a former two-term mayor of Providence.  Clark outpolled Cicciline by 43 votes, 135 to 92.

When she officially becomes assistant House speaker to Nancy Pelosi in early January, Clark will make history as the second-highest Democratic woman ever in the U.S. House.  If Dems retain control of the House in 2023-24, Clark has the potential to be a strong candidate in the contest to succeed Pelosi, who is expected to retire after this term.

Think about that.  

In less than 20 years, Katherine Clark will have gone from being a rookie school committee member in a little-known Massachusetts city to one of the most powerful positions in the federal House of Representatives, earning, in the process, a place in the history books. She'll practically be rubbing elbows with the ghosts of Jeannette Rankin, the first woman ever elected to the U.S. House (1916), and Shirley Chisholm, the first African-American woman elected to Congress (1968).  

The Boston Globe published a story on Clark's ascent on Thursday, Nov. 18, ("Clark elected to leadership role in the House/ Becomes most powerful Mass. congresswoman ever").  Here's an excerpt:

"Clark, 57, may not be the delegation's biggest star, but over three full terms she has recruited new members, become a prolific fund-raiser, and developed powerful alliances in the House, drawing on a low-key leadership style that has reportedly earned her the nickname 'the silent assassin.'  Her win on Wednesday puts her on track to rise further in the future, whenever the octogenarians currently holding the top three House leadership spots -- to which they were all re-elected Wednesday -- retire."

This past Wednesday, Nov. 24, I happened to catch the TV interview Jim Braude conducted with Clark on WGBH's Greater Boston.  I found it fascinating on at least two counts.  One, Clark was extremely adept at taking Braude's sharpest questions and launching pleasantly into short speeches overflowing with the points she wished to make.  (You could use a recording of the show to illustrate an entire class on political communications and media relations.)  Two, she answered Braude on why she's been tagged (by unnamed commenters) a "silent assassin" in the best way it could be answered, that is, by never repeating the words silent or assassin, and by musing calmly on how her "low-key style" may sometimes "catch people by surprise," or something like that.

A male congressman in the same situation might have been uncomfortable but probably would have betrayed at least a glimmer of satisfaction or amusement at being portrayed as a dangerous adversary, a tough guy behind the scenes.  By contrast, Clark's words and demeanor suggested it was an inconsequential, if not concocted, matter, and that she is not bothered enough to explain it, deny it, or show even the slightest irritation over it.  

Is Clark capable of moving a political opponent out of her way. Of course.  That's the business of politics.  But until there's specific information on one of these "assassinations," I'm chalking it up to intramural jealousy or gossip's natural exaggeration. 

P.S.  They never talked that way about her in Melrose.