Earlier this spring, Rep. Charles Murphy gave seven roll call votes – even though he was in the Virgin Islands. I haven’t heard of consequences of the deception, nor have I heard of any changes in the state house. Give credit to Robert David Sullivan and David Bernstein for refusing to let the “ghost voting” issue die.
Watch ’em go in Texas:

The quarterly newsletter of the Office of Campaign Finance is often a good read. The stories themselves are boring, but the “Recent Rulings” section is often full of gems. That’s where you see which candidates lost track of the details and which ones are more likely to run afoul of the law. (I was particularly interested in this one because I had heard there were complaints about unreported sign purchases in the recent special election of the 23rd Middlesex House seat. Either the report didn’t happen, or the ruling isn’t out yet.)

This edition has a real howler:

Robert Travaglini, Boston. The committee held fundraisers in 2005, but did not present approximately $80,000 in contributions to the bank for cashing and deposit because these checks were lost or misplaced. OCPF determined that the checks were not cashed by the committee or any other entity.

Our dear former President of the Senate went through the effort of having a fundraiser, convinced 160-plus people to write checks (at the maximum of $500 a pop, presumably), and then. . . . lost them? I must say, that’s a new one – he reported $80,000 in donations, but didn’t have the money!

I hope he hires a business manager for his new lobbying firm.

So Tom Finneran was not content to earn a few hundred thousand dollars per year with his radio gig. His original post-Speaker job as a lobbyist had been interrupted by that pesky felony conviction. The Mass Biotech Council didn’t want a felon as their public representative, and he was fired.

But a year had passed since then. Evidently Finneran thought that was enough time that people would forget that he was a felon and a perjurer. Is he that stupid? Or does he just have really low opinion of the public and its memory? It’s tough to say.

Whatever he thinks about the public, he miscalculated what his bosses at WRKO would think about his moonlighting. They recognized that when a talk radio host takes money from public employees he won’t be seen as a “fair” commentator. They enforced their contract with Finneran and forced him to give up his lobbying gig.

All of the press that I read about this was focused on WRKO and what they would do. Would they let Finneran be a lobbyist? Or would they (further) sell out their journalistic principles? What I can’t figure out is how the State Trooper’s union got off the hook.

Why would the State Trooper’s union hire a felon as their public representative? Aren’t they supposed to be on the side of the law? Of all the lobbyists, union leaders, senators, representatives, governors, and other State House insiders, why would they choose one who violated his oath and broke the law?

I’m not suggesting that it was illegal to hire a felon as a lobbyist. But it’s about the public relations, it’s about the image. If the State Police think they are best represented by a law breaker, what does that say about their respect for the law?

Menino makes it easy. . . to make fun of him. I’ve taken the mayor to task a couple of times before.  But this quote is so bad, so foolish, I almost feel guilty.  Almost.

“Allowing retailers to make money off of sick people is wrong.”

No commentary necessary; this one stands on its own.

When I ran for state representative in 2004, reform of the civil service system was one of my key themes. There is so much wrong with it. The years pass, and the system is still broken.

The system was originally intended to take patronage and nepotism out of hiring decision. The system is supposed to bring the best applicants into the fire and police departments. It’s supposed to create a pool of qualified candidates that then go through a regular hiring system (interviews, etc.) But, the system has been so warped by arbitrary “preferences” that the candidate’s qualifications (test scores) are almost irrelevant. The best-scoring candidates are routinely pushed out of the hiring pool by lesser-qualified candidates who meet some “preference” criteria. Everyone has to take the exam, but the hiring is driven more by your preference than by your score. MassInc has a fantastic piece by a Civil Service Commissioner that goes into detail explaining how these lesser-qualified candidates get hired.

The current law also discriminates on the basis of age, not merit. How is it possible in today’s Massachusetts that a qualified candidate is simply excluded from consideration because they’re too old?

Today’s Globe has a new reminder of yet another failing of the system: good ‘ol patronage. To recap:

1. Applicant scores poorly on civil service exam. (633rd on the list).
2. Applicant calls up Senate President Therese Murray. (” . . . who, said two public officials involved in helping the Hayhursts, told several influential people throughout the process that the Hayhursts were family friends and were deserving of special treatment.”)
3. Applicant calls up his state rep who activates the Representative Buddy System. (“Representative Stephen Stat Smith of Everett cosponsored the measure. ‘The reason I signed on is, as a new legislator, I’m not really familiar about the process,’ he said. ‘So I looked to some reps who are friends of mine who had some easy things that weren’t going to be controversial, and I just signed on to provide assistance to them and learn more about the process.'”)
4. Applicant enjoys an 88-minute Senate approval followed by House approval the next time it was in session. Applicant waits for Patrick to not-veto the move.
5. Applicant passes 632 more-qualified candidates, most of whom will never even get to even interview for the job.

The civil service is just begging for reform. Unfortunately, I think you need to reform the legislature, first.

Tuesday is the general election for the 4th Middlesex Senate seat. I concur with the common wisdom – Jim Marzilli is going to run away with it. Heck, even I’m voting for him, and I ran against him three years ago. Both of his opponents are trying to roll back the progress on gay rights. I may disagree with Marzilli on fiscal issues, but he’s the better choice for the job.

Before this election disappears from the public eye, it’s worth taking a look closer look at the Democratic primary. The post-primary election fund filing deadline is passed, and we can see how much was spent. The online reports are with the Office of Campaign Finance.

I noted some trends in the pre-primary filings last month. The trends continued, with a few items of note:

• Marzilli gave another $10k to his campaign, for a total of $20k in self funding.
• Natale loaned $19,800 to his campaign. He had loaned himself money for previous campaigns, and has a debt of $45k.
• Murphy continued to spend a lot of money on consultants.
• Donnelly has plenty of money to run a House campaign if he chooses.

The available funds is the candidate’s starting balance plus what they raised during the campaign.

The numbers pretty much speak for themselves, don’t they? When you win, your numbers look better. And when you lose, you wonder if you should have just mailed a check for $40 to every voter and asked them to vote for you – it would have been just as effective.

Regular readers of this blog know that I want to support Governor Deval Patrick, but I’ve frequently doubted whether he could meet the expectations of his supporters.

When he came out in support of casinos, I agreed. There is demand for gambling in Massachusetts. It’s not appropriate for the state to prevent its citizens from engaging in it. It’s dumb to not try to profit from it. It’s also reasonable to make sure that the casino business covers the costs to the hosting towns. Patrick’s plan had all that.

And then I heard about the part where Patrick wants to outlaw internet gambling. He wants to punish people with up to two years in prison and a $25,000 fine for placing a bet online from their own home. This is an awful idea in any context. It’s hypocritical when included in a bill that creates casino gambling.

If Patrick is trying to create opposition, he’s doing a good job by me. Patrick should file an amended bill without this foolish ban right away.

It’s crunch time in the election to replace Senator Havern. The primary is a week away. Yesterday was the deadline for the pre-primary campaign finance filing. It’s the first chance to see how the candidates are doing in the pocketbook. All of this information is from the Office of Campaign Finance. Unfortunately they don’t permit me to link to the individual reports; you have to search the candidates yourself and find more detail if you wish. In rank order:

Charley Murphy

Beginning Balance $37,517.29
Receipts $103,145.00
Subtotal $140,662.29
Expenditures $71,898.59
Ending Balance $68,763.70

Murphy started with the most, and raised second-most. He raised it with 553 donations averaging $180. They were almost all from Mass, and a few from out of state. 90% of the contributions are from individuals. 10% are from PACs, unions, and lobbyists. For his spending, his biggest ticket was $25,000 to Sage Consulting for database management and consulting. He has a paid staff person. He spent more than $10,000 on mailing. What’s not on this particular report is his upcoming TV ad.

Kenneth Donnelly

Beginning Balance $0.00
Receipts $108,146.84
Subtotal $108,146.84
Expenditures $71,866.40
Ending Balance $36,280.44

Donnelly isn’t an incumbent, so he has to start from zero – a real handicap. He overcame that by raising more than anyone else. He had 290 donations with an average of $360. Only 35% of his donations came from individuals. The rest came from unions and PACs, including a whopping $14,500 donation from Firefighters of Massachusetts (I was really surprised when I found out that this was legal. I can’t believe this exception to the $500 limit exists. It speaks volumes about who calls the shots in campaign finance law.). When you look closer, the firefighter unions really shelled out. Almost 100 different firefighter union local and states made donations, many from out of state. Half of the individual donation dollars came from current and retired firefighters. If Donnelly wins on Tuesday, he knows who to thank. Still, I can’t help but think that this base is too narrow, even in a 4-way primary. There are only so many firefighters in the district.

Jim Marzilli

Beginning Balance $14,612.00
Receipts $58,985.00
Subtotal $73,597.00
Expenditures $60,718.94
Ending Balance $12,878.06

Marzilli demonstrated that he can raise money when he needs to, more than he does in a House race, but he didn’t put up huge numbers. He had 375 donations for an average of $157. He donated $10,000 of his own money to the campaign. His data is totally mis-entered, so it’s hard to say for sure what the union/PAC/personal breakdown is. It appears to be all personal donations. Most of it is from in-state. For his expenditures, he spent $5000 on the VAN voter database. $37,000 has gone to printing and mailing. He also has a paid staff member.

Patrick Natale

Beginning Balance $15,955.56
Receipts $20,839.00
Subtotal $36,794.56
Expenditures $35,916.29
Ending Balance $878.27

Natale is not in the same league as the other three, but he still has a significant budget. He has 86 donations for an average of $217. 20% is from unions, and 80% from individuals. He spent $25,000 on printing and mailing. He also paid $5000 to American Fund Raising Group; given his fund raising receipts, I think he should demand a refund.

Brion Cangiamila

Beginning Balance $0.00
Receipts $1,970.00
Subtotal $1,970.00
Expenditures $2,175.11
Ending Balance ($205.11)

Yes, there is a Republican in this race. I don’t think the Democrats are worried about him at this point.