This isn’t as important as the school budget, but let’s have our own election here. How about a week of discussion first and then cast our ballots for senator here next weekend before the real election Tuesday.

To start the discussion:

Scott Brown

I’ve a friend in NY that’s a politician and he’s made some interesting points. He says, “Politics is a funny business – In a given legislature, the powers that be (those who actually influence legislation and spending) are perfectly happy if other legislators (especially new ones) do nothing of consequence and don’t interfere (concentrating instead on keeping their constituents happy). Our representatives can do a bad job, or no job at all, and their bosses won’t mind. The electorate can’t really tell so they may promote/elect that person to the next level.”

I’m politically independent and libertarian leaning, so I should be sympathetic to Brown’s “small government” stance, but unfortunately, I feel the previous paragraph’s thesis fits him (even more so since he’s a marginalized Republican), and I have to ask, “What has he really done?” For us? For anybody? Did he get the explicitly discriminatory taxation of high Mass Pike tolls reduced? Did he get the State’s “41B” affordable housing/town zoning over-riding regulation modified? Or what?

I went to his website and find that he has a family, is in the National Guard and is for lower taxation, but there was no great list of past accomplishments and no prescription of how we’re going to lower taxes given the current state of the government’s finances. I was almost embarressed for him, it’s like he’s an amateur, not a real player and not able to show that he understands what it means to be senatorial, and he’s only raised $400k. One can only hope that by the next time he runs for statewide office he will have focussed more on doing something that we can point to and say, “Good job”.

Martha Coakley

Honestly, I didn’t know anything about Martha Coakley, but comparing her biography to Brown’s is striking. Lawyer, Middlesex Assistant District Attorney, then District Attorney, special commisions, state-wide Attorney General. Always prosecuting, apply the law in specific cases. Legal associations’ head, many awards, always speaking, writing, lecturing… a much different feeling of accomplishment. Not an amateur, lawyers work in the real world and deal with laws and their effects every day. And she’s raised $4m so she will be on TV this week saying the things senators are supposed to say. Of course, I don’t believe her every word, but to me she seems more fit for the job, more senatorial.

What do you think?
(And don’t forget to vote.)