Last week did tell us quite a bit about Massachusetts’ political culture. The Supreme Court’s healthcare and gay marriage decisions made many of us proud of the path our inclusive social policy paved. Medical marijuana, gambling, and on-line voter registration nonetheless showed the Bay State both policy leader and laggard, equal parts progressive and moralist, as well as more elitist than pluralist.
The Governor’s restrained criticism of Democratic patronage hiring in last year’s campaign showed that he understands how and when it’s appropriate to play a long game rather than to jump on a potentially explosive short term “game changer.” His strategic hiring of failed GOP candidates across the Commonwealth signals that this Governor, unlike his Republican predecessors, is serious about rebuilding his state party.
The following two increasingly inescapable realities compel me to call the race for the White House now so we can dispense with all the unserious presidential prognostication and start focusing on something about which reasonable doubt remains:
1. None of her competitors (announced or potential) can beat Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic nomination.
2.The 2016 presidential election will turn on a choice between four more years of divided government and Republican control of the federal government.
I’ll take your questions now.
It’s been some time since I’ve given much thought to how much power and influence public interested activists and nonprofits have in our regulatory environment. Then I read Tuesday’s Globe and came across an eye opening piece about the Conservation Law Foundation and TDI-New England, a developer that hopes to bring hydropower to the region.