Herald Sounding Bitter

In a otherwise positive editorial on the new Charlestown wind technology center in today's Boston Herald, the editors could not resist inserting a little dig at Governor Deval Patrick:

"Hosting a national wind technology testing center will boost the clean energy technology sector already taking root in Massachusetts," Patrick said. (He might want to keep in mind this kind of energy innovation -- centered on job-creation and attracting manufacturers -- before venturing off on the predictable path of government limits on energy profits, a plan he unveiled yesterday in The Boston Globe.)

Frankly, it seems that the Herald is just upset they got scooped by the Globe more than by any ideological differences. In fact, the companies whose profits would be "limited", to use the Herald's words -- namely NStar and National Grid -- are reportedly on board with the Patrick plan at this early stage. Sure, the Devil's always in the details, but if the governor can come up with some way to change the incentive that utility companies have to get us to use as much power as possible, we'd have a real shot at not only saving consumers some money, but also reducing the costs for those who supply our power. It's a win-win situation. Unfortunately, the Herald's parenthetical aside shows that they're more interested in dinging the Governor for choosing the wrong paper to make the announcement in than in actual solutions.

Update: The Herald's parenthetical aside looks even more foolish in light of Jay Fitzgerald's article today in their paper that argues the opposite point -- that the Patrick plan would cause too much profit for energy companies.

Herald Goes Over the Top on Community Colleges

I get that "state employees add to their already generous salaries" is the Boston Herald's bread and butter, but I have to take exception to Dave "I committed libel" Wedge's latest story about community college salaries. Wedge describes the schools as a haven for "perk jobs" for politicians, cops and judges. When he actually gets around to describing these jobs, they turn out to be the few thousand dollars one would get for teaching a course at the school. The largest "perk job" is about $4,000 for teaching a semester-long course. Is the Herald's position that community colleges should not offer courses taught by people in the real world, or do they think that those who teach should not be compensated for their time? And $4,000? I've had week-long training seminars that cost more than that, let alone semester-long courses. The community colleges are getting a deal, as far as I'm concerned!

As for the six-figure salaries for the community college presidents, I couldn't quickly find numbers that were limited to community colleges specifically, but Salary.com puts the numbers the Herald reported at the low end of the curve for College Chancellors.

I also understand that Governor Patrick's plan to eliminate tuition on community colleges would be expensive, and that's lead some to call him a "dreamer". The point of coming up with these ten and fifteen year plans is so we don't have to pay for all of this all at once. We can phase things in as funds become available and we figure out what works. But if you don't have a goal, you'll never reach it.

Herald: Mitt's a Failure

Who would have thought that the Boston Herald would have the perfect antidote to the $146,000, 24-page campaign booklet Mitt Romney had inserted in today's Globe. While I've not yet seen a copy of the insert, the Herald has splashed a picture of a dour Mitt holding one of the brochures with the headline "Poor Marks for Mitt". Inside they have a 'special report' slamming the Governor for his poor performance in his first two and a half years. Here's a sample:

As he weighs his prospects in the 2008 presidential race, the slick PR brochure paid for by Romney's campaign committee boasts of "the state's remarkable turnaround" and "reform efforts . . . taking root throughout state government." But the governor omits key facts:

• Residents fled Massachusetts at a rate of 75 per day during Romney's first full year as governor.

A net of nearly 28,000 people up and left the Bay State in 2003 for better prospects elsewhere.

• Unemployment is down under Romney, from 192,000 just before he took office, in December 2002, to 160,556 last month. But that doesn't mean jobs have risen. Non-farm payrolls in December 2002 were 3.42 million. Last month: 3.37 million.

The labor force has simply shrunk by about 800,000, or one sixth, during that time. Indeed, Massachusetts has lost a net 11,000 jobs since Romney took office.
[..]
Most ominous: The state's technology sector, once the envy of the nation, continues to lose ground. Information technology employment is down 12,700, or 13 percent, so far under Romney. During the same period, California's IT jobs have declined by just 1 percent.

Along with the article, the Herald also published a mock Report Card for the governor. While Mitt did manage to get some A's, they were in the subects of "Doing presidential politicking on the taxpayer's dime" and "Flip-flopping on abortion and dancing around gay marriage". The only A+ the Governor managed was in "Staying fit for the campaign trail".

Check out both articles. I'll probably have more on the brochure after I've managed to track down a hard copy of the Globe.

Desk Clearing

I just wanted to get a couple of items off of my desk before I post about the convention, otherwise I'd never get around to posting them.

From the Phoenix:
The Boston Phoenix has an interesting article on Democracy for America Boston, and the other progressive groups that have sprung up around the Commonwealth in the past few years. At one point they wonder if this is going to be the new face of machine politics in Boston, but I don't think that can happen. For one thing, there's too much overlap -- at least ideologically -- with good-government organizations (like Common Cause, for example) for progressive groups to ever really consolidate power and dole out patronage. In addition, the whole point of these groups, in my opinion, is to give people who are on the outside a chance to feel like they have some influence. If it gets to the point where they are perceived as "insider" or "special interest" groups, I think they end up losing their appeal.

From the Herald:
Herald reporter Dave Wedge, who by the way was found guilty of committing libel earlier this year, had an article criticizing Deval Patrick on his stance on affirmative action. To show how extreme Patrick was, he quoted Clint Bolick of the Institute for Justice -- a "libertarian" law firm funded by the same right-wing billionaires that bring you the Cato Institute. The problem, though, is that Bolick is an anti-affirmative action zealot. It was like asking PETA for their opinion on my eating a roast beef sandwich for lunch. There's more on the Institute from RightWatch.

The day before, of course, Wedge had an article about Patrick's opposition to the Death Penalty that even the conservative, pro-death penalty Carpundit thought was unfair.

From the blogs:
According to Marry in Massachusetts, Jarrett Barrios of all people has proposed a bill that would both ban gay marriages and civil unions in Massachusetts. Barrios, of course, married his longtime same-sex partner in November. This would seem a gambit on Barrios's part to keep conservatives who are both against gay marriage and civil unions from voting in favor of the civil union amendment at the Constitutional Convention this fall. Last year, if you recall, a number of conservatives voted against the amendment and supporters of equal marriage rights are not counting on their votes this time around. Barrios is gambling that legislators who oppose civil unions will vote for this bill and against the civil union amendment (and as such, in favor of the status quo), but that the more restrictive bill will not pass.