P.O. Box 13: Smith goes negative (Part 3)

Part 3 of our look at campaign mailers in the 13th Worcester House District race. This review includes mailers sent through September 8. Also see Part 1, Part 2, Part 4 and Part 5.

Entering the last week before the election, Joff Smith took the offensive with the first negative mailer of the campaign (or at least, the first one since we began keeping track), while John Mahoney followed up his first, biographical effort with one focused more on issues.

John Mahoney
"A Fresh Take on the Issues"
Finally, Mahoney lets us know he's more than just a tall guy, with another mammoth 8.5" x 11" job with nice, big type. Mahoney "will fight for tax incentives to entice businesses to locate in and around Worcester and Paxton." He also says the right things about education, protecting children from crime and bullying, and constituent service ("no issue is too small").

Don Sharry
"Vote for Don Sharry"
Exact same postcard as Sharry's last, and addressed to the exact same person, so it's probably not a case of being listed twice on his address list. If I was going to read it the second time, chances are I'd already read it the first time. See my reaction here.

Mike Perotto
"Experienced and Accomplished"
This Sept. 8 mailer is essentially the same message as the previous Perotto postcard, but in larger size (11" x 6"). His priorities are: "Create and retain jobs ... Increase Chapter 70 funding for education ... Lower taxes and spend wisely ... Service constituent requests." Lotta controversy there.

Joff Smith
"Stood Up for Taxpayers"
An 8.5" x 5" mailer that Rosalie Tirella hates, so it's got that going for it. Obverse is a four-paragraph letter with the usual "I know firsthand that we need to support our small businesses" and "change can't happen on its own" type of sentiment. Reverse is where the controversy is: Joff lined up next to silhouettes labeled "John Mahoney" and "Margot Barnet," and a paragraph next to each one. Joff's highlights his lowest-residential-tax-rate votes. Mahoney's blurb accuses him of being "part of the group" that wants a cut in the business tax rate, which would raise residential tax rates. Barnet's says she's "opposed to a bill that would create 15,000 new jobs in MA." It would be nice to know what bill this is (Tirella argues convincingly that it's the casino bill; Barnet is the only one of the six candidates to oppose casinos). The mailer implies that Barnet is controlled by special interests that want to raise property taxes. In both cases, the candidates' relationships to proposed residential tax hikes are a bit more nuanced than the mailer suggests; this is politics, but in terms of this week's catch, it's the only one to go negative, so it's an outlier in terms of tone.

This is the third in a series of "P.O. Box 13" blog posts about campaign mailers in the 13th Worcester House District race. The opinions expressed are those of a 13th Worcester District voter and not necessarily those of CMassPolitics.com. The series continues here.

P.O. Box 13: Résumés on postcards (Part 2)

Part 2 of our look at campaign mailers in the 13th Worcester House District race. This review includes mailers received through September 4. Also see Part 1, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.

Only a couple mailers trickled in during the week after the big debate, both of them small and jam-packed with text, as opposed to the previous spacious, slick and graphics-driven efforts from the purported frontrunners:

Mike Perotto
"Leader for You"
First of the postcard-sized postcards, but also the wordiest one yet; break out the magnifying glass (don't let the image fool you -- this one was the size of an average tourist's postcard, tiny compared to the other mailers). Easily the most specifics yet; he gives highlights of his 14-year tenure on the City Council and promises to (among other things) "be an ambassador to startup and high-tech businesses"; "scrutinize the budget"; and "return your phone calls and e-mails the same day or the following morning." This is damning with faint praise, though; he still doesn't give any truly specific proposals.

Don Sharry 
"Vote for Don Sharry"
Slightly longer than a postcard; more photos than Perotto's. Under the heading "Uniquely Qualified" on the back, says he's a health insurance professional and a business owner, specializing in employee benefit plans. Well ... so is Perotto, isn't he? Can't both be "unique." Obverse is a six-paragraph letter to district voters that probably would have worked better in bulleted format, although the boldface does help. "We need someone who has the experience and knowledge to help control spiraling budgets, unfunded mandates and ever-rising health insurance costs." OK, but how? We're invited to visit donsharry4staterep.com "to learn more," but the "Issues" page there (as of today) is simply the text of the mailer, without any explanation.

If Perotto and Sharry (and Gina DiBaro) are really shaping up to be also-rans, as scuttlebutt has it, they need great mailers even more than the three "front-runners." So why do campaigns spend the big bucks to send these things out, if they're not going to take full advantage of my attention and give me a reason to vote? Knowing the names of your kids isn't going to win you my vote. Maybe the next week will bring more specifics ... keep an eye on that mailbox and on this blog!

This is the second in a series of "P.O. Box 13" blog posts about campaign mailers in the 13th Worcester House District race. The opinions expressed are those of a 13th Worcester District voter and not necessarily those of CMassPolitics.com. The series continues here.

CMassPolitics.com Interview: Mike Perotto, 13th Worcester House District

CMassPolitics.com spoke with Mike Perotto (D-Worcester) about his campaign for state representative in the 13th Worcester House District.

13th Worcester: Barnet leads in fundraising, cash on hand

Buoyed by a $10,000 personal loan to her campaign, Margo Barnet (D-Worcester) led all of her Democratic challengers in fundraising for the 13th Worcester District House seat.

Barnet raised just over $33,000 in the reporting period from January 1 through August 27. She also has more cash remaining in her campaign account, reporting $14,694 left to spend in her quest for the open seat being vacated by Bob Spillane (D-Worcester).

However, a closer look at Barnet's report with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance indicates that she could be in for more criticism from fellow candidates over her perceived ties to special interests.

In last week's debate, Barnet came under fire for the endorsements she has received from Political Action Committees across the state. Campaign records show that Barnet has benefited from those PACs to the tune of $2,700, more than any other candidate in the race.

Her main critic at the debate, Mike Perotto (D-Worcester), has also been a top beneficiary of PAC money. Perotto's take from PACs was second in the district, with $1,900 logged from the organizations. No other candidate in the race has received more than $550 from PACs and two candidates, Gina DiBaro (D-Worcester) and Joff Smith (D-Worcester) reported no PAC money at all.

Barnet has also raised more money from out-of-state and out-of-district sources than any of the other candidates. 58% of the $23,159 she has raised (outside of her personal loan) have come from donors outside of Worcester or Paxton, with over $4,600 of that coming from outside of Massachusetts.

Despite leading all candidates in fundraising, Barnet has raised the least money from Worcester and Paxton, bringing in only a tick over $7,000 from the towns in the district. The best local fundraiser was DiBaro, who pulled in $10,420 from local donors.

(Smith only logged $6,975 in itemized receipts from the district, but logged over $3,000 in small, un-itemized contributions. While his verified contributions were less than Barnet's, he undoubtedly brought in more than $50 in small contributions from the district. Barnet itemized all of her receipts, claiming zero un-itemized contributions)

Smith and Don Sharry (D-Worcester) find themselves in a strong position to make a late push, each of them having over $12,000 still in the bank. Despite raising nearly $20,000 in the period, DiBaro has spent nearly all of it, leaving her campaign with just over $3,000 to spend in the last week of campaigning. Perotto's campaign is also nearly broke, with just $1,330 left out of nearly $17,000 raised.

John Mahoney (D-Worcester) raised the smallest amount in the period, banking just over $15,000, however he started the period with over $15,500 from his city council campaign coffers.

Here are some raw numbers:

Total Fundraising (1/1/10-8/27/10)
Margot Barnet...$33,159
Joff Smith...$19,714
Gina DiBaro...$19,430
Don Sharry...$17,245
Mike Perotto...$16,716
John Mahoney...$15,165

Cash on hand (as of 8/27/10)
Barnet...$14,694
Smith...$12,944
Sharry...$12,455
Mahoney...$9,117
DiBaro...$3,310
Perotto...$1,330

District Contributions*
DiBaro...$10,420
Sharry...$9,745
Mahoney...$9,250
Perotto...$7,550*
Barnet...$7,017
Smith...$6,975*

Out-of-District Contributions (Out-of-State in parentheses)*
Barnet...$13,442 ($4,621)
Smith...$9,700 ($550)*
DiBaro...$9,010 ($600)
Sharry...$7,250 ($900)
Mahoney $5,365 ($500)
Perotto $3,850 ($450)*

Political Action Committees
Barnet...$2,700
Perotto...$1,900
Mahoney...$550
Sharry...$250
DiBaro...$ 0
Smith...$ 0

*--"District" includes all contributions from Worcester and Paxton. Many contributions from Worcester may have been from parts of the city outside the district. Smith and Perotto each reported over $3,000 in un-itemized contributions, which are not included in the District and Out-of-District totals.

Thursday, the 13th

Last night was a night for the Democratic candidates in the 13th Worcester House District to shine, as a standing-room only crowd filled The Willows in Worcester to hear the six contenders face off in a spirited debate. We start the coverage with an original report from CMassPolitics.com:

If Margot Barnet and Joff Smith weren't already the frontrunners in the 13th Worcester House race, they were certainly treated as such Thursday night at the Willows in Worcester. In a debate where all six Democratic candidates were allowed to ask questions of each other, Barnet and Smtih were the two with targets painted on their backs.

Smith was repeatedly called upon to defend his record on the Worcester City Council, while several candidates made veiled -- and outright -- critiques of Barnet's endorsements by teachers and nurses unions.

Jeremy Shulkin of Worcester Magazine was also there and noted that more often than not, when candidates went on the attack, they were the ones to lose the battle:

Any kind of attack on a candidate’s record or position rarely worked last night (and on two specific occasions it backfired on the attacker).

It’s no secret that Barnet has been endorsed by some heavy-hitting unions, including nurses and teachers. As Perotto pried into those endorsements, calling them “special interests,” Barnet asked if he sought endorsements as well. He answered that he did, but it doesn’t change the fact that they’re “trying to control you.” (After the debate, a source from another campaign said the correct response would have been “Yes, we met, but I wouldn’t agree with their demands.”)

The other gaffe was a Mahoney attack on Smith for using his political power to get a road paved that raised the value of his family’s company, Goldstein Scrap Metal. Mahoney’s mistake? His source was a publication that, as Smith pointed out, recently smeared a Worcester firefighter. He then got the audience on his side by mentioning that certain writer’s feud with Dianne Williamson. When Mahoney clarified to mean Harding Street, Smith pointed out that his family’s business isn’t located there.

The writer and publication cited by Mahoney was Roaslie Tirella of the In City Times who, in her own inimitable way, ripped Smith for his defense in a post this morning:

Wow! We had wanted to mention Joff Smith in our blog about moron’s (see below) because he embodies everything that is creepy about America: Joff Smith thinks he is a TV/movie star! Smith, who is in his late 20s, actually has an agent! Someone who tries to get him into the movies! Someone who actually makes calls on the behalf of Smith’s acting career.

(One could argue that calling someone a moron in print loses its effectiveness when the writer incorrectly uses the possessive tense "moron's" instead of the plural "morons.")

The Telegram also covered the debate, and their coverage has drawn criticism from candidate Gina DiBaro. On her facebook page, she notes:

Please see [the] article that was posted last evening after the debate. Where my name was mentioned. For some reason it was not published this am in the telegram & gazette !!!!!

Specifically, she is noting that while the original online version of the story included three paragraphs on DiBaro, the version that hit newsstands and doorsteps left her comments on the cutting room floor. The missing links:

After the back and forth between Mr. Perotto and Mr. Smith, Ms. DiBaro, a former assistant district attorney and one of the quieter voices at the debate, chimed in.

“Can we weigh in on why we wouldn't vote for either of them?” she said.

Asked about Worcester County Sheriff candidate Thomas J. Foley, who retired from the state police with full medical disability, Ms. DiBaro said that since Mr. Foley has said he will not collect his full salary if he becomes sheriff, he would, in a sense, save the state money.

Those paragraphs have been tacked onto the end of the latest online version.

Barnet, Smith targeted in 13th District debate

If Margot Barnet and Joff Smith weren't already the frontrunners in the 13th Worcester House race, they were certainly treated as such Thursday night at the Willows in Worcester. In a debate where all six Democratic candidates were allowed to ask questions of each other, Barnet and Smtih were the two with targets painted on their backs.

Smith was repeatedly called upon to defend his record on the Worcester City Council, while several candidates made veiled -- and outright -- critiques of Barnet's endorsements by teachers and nurses unions.

The candidates are running for state representative in Paxton and several precincts of Worcester, to replace the retiring Robert Spellane (D-Worcester). The winner of the Sept. 14 Democratic primary will face Paul Franco (R-Worcester) and Ronal Madnick (U-Worcester) on the November ballot.

The knock on Smith: "I don't think he's distinguished himself on the City Council. He's been a follower, not a leader" -- John Mahoney. "He just didn't get it sometimes. You need experience. He let 25,000 trees be cut in his district. Unfortunately, he didn't take the leadership role" -- former colleague Mike Perotto. "Joff is trying to have it both ways. I'm not sure what we should be doing [about taxes]. Joff's saying it like it's an easy answer. I think he's pandering" -- Barnet.

Smith painted himself as the taxpayers' advocate on the council, saying he'd stood up to the administration in voting against tax increases, but Perotto and Mahoney took him to task for supporting the lowest residential tax rate -- and thereby maintaining a higher tax rate for businesses, driving businesses out of the city and ultimately increasing the share that must be borne by homeowners.

Late in the debate, John Mahoney tried to pin Smith on a charge of using his political influence to ensure that his family's business's road was repaved. Smith said Mahoney was mistaken.

"You've got to take a look at your source -- InCity Times, which is known for not always reporting the facts," Smith said. His family's business is "on a cobblestone road," not on busy Harding Street as Mahoney had alleged.

Barnet declared herself "proud to have the support of the people who teach our children, the people who take care of our ill." She had a quick rejoinder for Perotto's charge that she was "beholden to special interests."

"Did you seek any of those endorsements?" she asked. He admitted he had. "Then why are you attacking me for having received them?"

"They want to control you, Margot," Perotto replied. Other candidates, later in the debate, emphasized their "independence" from "special interests."

Late in the debate, both Barnet and Perotto pulled insider moves on Don Sharry, quizzing him on health care. Perotto asked him for his opinion on "Chapter 58." Sharry floundered a bit before admitting he didn't know what Chapter 58 is. It's the state health insurance law, Perotto responded; Sharry said he'd like to see the cost of care cut.

"We're both in the health care industry and we both understand this," Perotto said, "but at least I understand what Chapter 58 is."

Barnet asked Sharry what committees he'd like to join, if elected; he said he'd worked in health insurance for 20 years, so he'd like to serve on that committee.


"Which committee is that?" she asked.

"That would be the health insurance committee," he said, admitting he didn't know its exact name.

Barnet's only clear misstep was an overreliance on prepared statements; both her opening and closing statements ran over the alotted time, and she hesitated and dithered before answering a question in the middle of the debate that she had planned to address in her closing remarks. It's hard to say anyone "won" the debate, although Smith and Gina DiBaro managed to avoid making any mistakes.

State House Roundup: Prickly debate in 13th Worcester

The six candidates for the Democratic nomination in the 13th Worcester District squared off in a 90-minute debate yesterday at Anna Maria. From the looks of the Telegram photo, the event was a greuling one for the participants. According to the report the dialogue became testy at times, with more than one tart exchange between dueling candidates:

The most heated exchanges came at the end of the session. Ms. [Gina] DiBaro, assistant district attorney in the Worcester district attorney's office on a leave of absence to run for the seat, asked Mr. [Mike] Perotto, who spent 14 years on the Worcester City Council, if he would support a move toward making state legislators part time.

Mr. Perotto did not support such an effort.

“You get what you pay for, Gina,” Mr. Perotto said. He said people need to be paid for the work they're doing.

Ms. DiBaro said states such as New Hampshire and New Jersey use part-time legislators, but Mr. Perotto cut in.

“They have no roads; they have no schools,” Mr. Perotto said, as the audience started clapping and chiming in.

In another exchange, Worcester City Councilor Joff Smith defended his vote to raise his councilor's salary by nearly double in response to a question from John Mahoney (D-Worcester). Smith reminded Mahoney and the audience that Mahoney had run and lost a recent campaign for councilor.

Not discussed last night (or at least not mentioned in the article) was the attendance of retiring Rep. Bob Spellane (D-Worcester). Shaun Sutner reported that Spellane missed 52% of the votes cast in the House this year. Two other retiring representatives, Chris Donelan (D-Orange) in the Second Frankliin District and Bob Rice (D-Gardner) also missed around 10% of the votes cast. It will be interesting to see if attendance at the State House becomes an issue in the last few weeks of the Democratic Primaries for those three seats.

Second Franklin House District
Speaking of the Second Franklin, video of the Tuesday debate in Greenfield has been posted to the Greenfield Community Television Web site.

37th Middlesex House District
Kurt Hayes (R-Boxboro) will be hosting an open forum at the Thayer Memorial Library in Lancaster tonight at 7:00 p.m.

Worcester and Middlesex Senate District
Sen. Jennifer Flanagan (D-Leominster) recently touted her bill to "establish the Johnny Appleseed Trail Association as a Regional Tourism Council."

Thursday roundup: A new sheriff in town

The Telegram really brings it today with a bunch of stories on area politics in their Thursday edition, led by a look at last night's Sheriff's debate in Harvard:

Three candidates for Worcester County sheriff last night promised to kick politics out of the Worcester County Jail and House of Correction, while the fourth candidate, an assistant deputy superintendent at the facility in West Boylston said the jail has already been professionalized.

The emphasis at a sheriff candidates forum at the Harvard Unitarian Universalist Church was more on individual qualifications to run the Sheriff's Department than differences over issues. The forum was sponsored by the Worcester County Chapter of the Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, with Ronal C. Madnick, director of the chapter, posing questions to the candidates.

Madnick (U-Worcester), you may remember, is a candidate for state rep. in the 13th Worcester district. His participation as a moderator in this debate has sparked some discussion of a conflict of interest.

The Telegram's lead columnist, Diane Williamson, also took a look at candidate Tom Foley. Specifically, she examines the questions surrounding his retirement from the State Police due to a heart problem and the effect that issue is having on the race:

When Foley retired at age 50, he filed for and was granted a disability pension due to a heart condition. Under state law, he receives a tax-free pension — $112,000 — equal to 72 percent of his salary. The sheriff’s salary is $123,000, although under law Foley would only be eligible for about $93,000.

His opponents raise valid questions. If someone is so disabled that he must retire from one public job, how can he take another one? Is he disabled, or isn’t he? Just this week, while endorsing [Scott] Bove, the Worcester County Superior Officers Union said Foley couldn’t meet the “basic requirements” for sheriff because of his health, as the sheriff must also be a correction officer.

Williamson concludes that Foley's health is less of an issue than a flawed pension "system that encourages excess and abuse."
 
Elsewhere...
 
Third Congressional District
Brian Herr (R-Hopkinton) says the appropriations bill that passed congress earlier this week was akin to a shakedown:

It's no surprise that Jim McGovern voted for this bill...during his political career he has received $1,176,725 in contributions from labor unions. This year alone, he has received $2,500 from the American Federation of Teacher, $2,500 from the National Association of Firefighters, and $2,000 from the National Education Association.

It looks like the vote for this bill was nothing more than a $26 billion political payback.

Robert Delle (R-Westboro/Wayland/Paxton) talks about his upcoming move to Paxton and his campaign for office. He also says he "considers President Obama a socialist and is so wary of government spending that he believes people are 'stealing' federal stimulus money, though he didn't say who."

In an op-ed for the MetroWest Daily News, Michael Stopa (R-Holliston) argues that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is crowding out private investment and hurting the economy.

Fifth Congressional District
The four candidates for the Republican nomination discussed their ambitions at a debate in Concord:

When it came time to ask questions to one another, the candidates touched on tort reform for the healthcare bill, cost of living increases and the first piece of legislation they would file if elected.


Repealing the healthcare bill would be first on Golnik’s list, while Weaver said he would like to establish and chair an anti-appropriations committee to look at the books and cut unnecessary expenses. Shapiro would start by slapping a dollar limit on the federal budget and keeping bills under 100 pages, and Meas said he would seek to become the Ways and Means chairman and simplify the tax code to stimulate the economy.

13th Worcester House District
Mike Perotto (D-Worcester) visited Worcester Community Cable Access's "What It's Worth" show.

Shaun Sutner of the Telegram checks in on the relationship between Joff Smith (D-Worcester) and Worcester Mag columnist and former city councilor Gary Rosen. Sutner also looks at the efforts of Paul Franco (R-Worcester) in Paxton.