The Conversation

The game is rigged, folks…

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick said on Friday that he and President Barack Obama discussed a proposal that would pave the way for him to appoint an interim successor for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy and that White House aides have been in frequent contact with the governor about the matter.

In his first public comments about the push to change the state’s succession law in nearly three weeks, Patrick, a Democrat, said that the conversation with Obama took place at Kennedy’s funeral in Boston last month.

The governor told reporters that Obama aides have been in touch with him since then and that they are supportive of a bill that would give Patrick the authority to temporarily fill the vacant United States Senate seat, providing the administration with a crucial 60th Democratic vote in the chamber as lawmakers debate health care reform.

“He and his whole team have been very clear about that,” Patrick told reporters after holding a meeting with his cabinet in Richmond, Mass. where he is recuperating from hip replacement surgery.

Patrick confirmed on Friday that he was considering a list of potential contenders for the temporary seat should that option become available but said he has not decided who he would appoint.

Speculation among political insiders in Massachusetts about who Patrick might choose has focused on the state’s former governor and 1988 Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis. Also mentioned are and a handful of Democratic Party elders, including Paul Kirk Jr., the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who now chairs the board of the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, former Lt. Gov. Evelyn Murphy and former state Senate President Robert Travaglini.

UPDATE: More from the Globe, Washington Post and New York Times.

SECOND UPDATE: More from Red Mass Group, the Herald and Michele McPhee.

Senatorial Privilege

Human Events on Governor Patrick’s next step.

As Edward Kennedy was mourned and laid to rest over the weekend, talk about what will happen to his open Senate seat grew louder.

On Friday, there were reports that the Massachusetts legislature would follow Kennedy’s final wish and change the five-year-old Senate succession law. Such a change would permit Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick to appoint an interim senator until the special election is held no earlier than 145 days after Kennedy’s death and no more than 160 days. (That means in January).

This would be the second Democratic opportunistic change to the law. The last time – when Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry might have vacated his seat for the presidency — the Democratic legislature took the power of gubernatorial appointment away from then-governor Mitt Romney.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) encouraged the Bay State lawmakers to give the governor power to appoint a senator. Reid seemed to be speaking for many national Democrats on Thursday when he voiced the feeling that as many Democratic votes as possible were needed in the Senate if Obama-backed health care reform comes to a vote before January.

On Thursday, there was speculation that if the rules change was passed, Gov. Patrick might appoint a “senior statesman” such as former governor and 1988 Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis to serve in the Senate until January. By Friday night, however, speculation on a stopgap senator seemed to move toward former Democratic National Chairman Paul Kirk, Jr. As Joe Kennedy noted in his remarks about his uncle, Kirk had been a close friend of Ted Kennedy since his first Senate race in 1962.

Few in Massachusetts would think the state legislature is not shameless enough to reverse itself in four years for blatantly political reasons. But sources in Boston said that there were a number of Democratic legislators — notably State Sen. Brian Joyce — having jitters about a reversal that is that self-serving. The Boston Herald’s columnist Howie Carr was his usual cynical self when he concluded: “Ultimately, there’s nothing in the bill [to permit a Senate appointment] for the Legislature, so we must assume it won’t be passed.”

UPDATE: More from the Boston Herald.

SECOND UPDATE: From WBUR, Michael Graham and Boston Globe.

Dukakis Plays The Race Card

I’ve long believed that with Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee, that the Democrats would play the race card to insulate Obama from attacks.

And, of course, who better to play the race card than Mike Dukakis, who thinks the infamous Willie Horton ad that demonstrated his poor record on crime was also a race-based attack.

Former Gov. Michael Dukakis said Monday that John McCain’s presidential campaign is using the same race-based tactics that were used against him in his 1988 presidential run.

The Brookline Democrat was referring to a recent McCain ad that claimed Democratic nominee Barack Obama received economic advice from Franklin Raines, the former CEO of the recently bailed out mortgage lender Fannie Mae. The ad features images of Raines and Obama, two African Americans, and then an image of an elderly white woman.

Asked if he considered the ad to be in the same vein as the infamous ‘Willie Horton’ ad ad run by a third party group in support of George H.W. Bush in the 1988 presidential campaign, Dukakis told PolitickerMA.com: “Essentially, yes.”
[..]
First, Dukakis said, the McCain ad is based on a lie. Raines isn’t one of Obama’s closest economic advisors, he said. Other members from Fannie Mae have advised Obama but the McCain camp chose to focus the ad specifically on Raines, an African American.

“Why did they pick that person from Fannie Mae?” he asked rhetorically.

What Dukakis has chosen to ignore is that McCain also has an ad highlighting Obama’s ties to Jim Johnson, former FAnnie MAe CEO who also once led Obama’s VP selection team. Johnson is white. So, to ask the same question Dukakis did, “Why did they pick that person from Fannie Mae?”

Must have been Johnson’s race.

Dukakis Unable To Name A Single Specific Accomplishment of Barack Obama

Mike Dukakis, who is battling with Deval Patrick for the label of the worst governor of Massachusetts, was on with Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes after Bill Clinton’s speech to the Democratic National Convention, and when challenged by Hannity to name a specific accomplishment of Barack Obama between his years in the Illinois State Senate and the U.S. Senate, he could come up with a single thing. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

It was classic. I hope you caught that one.

UPDATE: The Massachusetts Republican Party issued the following statement in response to John Kerry’s speech at the Democrat National Convention.

US Senate Candidate Jeff Beatty said, “America can’t afford to have Barack Obama and John Kerry bringing their remakes of the same, tired failed liberal policies of the past to Washington at a time when so much is at stake. Barack Obama is not ready to lead and John Kerry never has.”

Beatty added,“As a U.S. senator, I’ll draw on my experience as a business executive to develop and support comprehensive National Economic policies that pass the “common sense” test and I will use my leadership experience as a former FBI Special Agent, CIA counter-terrorism officer and member of the Army’s elite Delta Force to pursue National Security policies that will truly secure America’s future at home and abroad. We don’t need a weaker America with Barack Obama and John Kerry, we need a stronger America with John McCain and Jeff Beatty.”

Could Romney Be Horton-ed By Tavares?

Oh, the correlations being made lately between Daniel Tavares Jr. and Willie Horton… sounds pretty bad doesn’t it, particularly if you are Mitt Romney. Everyone is talking about the similarities between these two cases, but why isn’t anyone focusing on the differences?

Let’s look at Willie Horton’s case. Then governor Michael Dukakis, and his lieutenant governor, John Kerry, supported the Prison Furlough Program that allowed convicted criminals, including violent criminals and murderers, to be released for a period of 48 hours, unsupervised, on the honor system. Willie Horton was released onto the streets under this program on June 6, 1986. Horton never returned to the Concord Correctional Facility.

Less than year later, on April 3, 1987, Horton was in Oxon Hill, Maryland, where he attacked 28-year-old Clifford Barnes, stabbing him 22 times. When Barnes’ fianc√©e Angela Miller returned, she was gagged and raped twice by Horton. 6 months later on October 20, Horton was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences plus 85 years. The Maryland court system would not send Horton back to Massachusetts, out of the fear his being furloughed back onto the streets.

Democrats blame Dukakis’s defeat in 1988 in part to the repeated mention of the Horton case by George H. W. Bush, as well as an ad called “Weekend Passes” that ran in September 1988, which attacked Dukakis for his role in the Horton case.

Now, lets look at this case involving Daniel Tavares Jr.

Romney appointed judge Kathe M. Tuttman, who made the decision to let Tavares Jr. free after serving 16 years in prison for murdering his own mother. Today, Tavares Jr. is accused in the double-murder of Brian and Beverly Mauck.

Sure, there are correlations here–no one will deny it. It’s almost a spooky Massachusetts twist going on here. That said, the differences in the two stories should not go unnoticed.

Governor Dukakis believed in the Prison Furlough Program and believed that it was “rehabilitative.” Given the chance to let the program be banned, Dukakis vetoed the bill that would have put an end to prison furloughs for first-degree murderers in 1976. At the time, Dukakis said vetoing the bill would “cut the heart out of inmate rehabilitation.” Around 80 convicts are at still at large today due to the prison furlough program.

Mitt Romney, however, while responsible for appointing Tuttman, is not responsible for her decision to free Tavares. Looking at Romney’s record, the idea that he would permit such a release is just crazy. Romney is the only governor in modern Massachusetts history to deny every request for a pardon or commutation during his tenure (there were 100 requests for commutations, and 172 requests for pardons). What was Romney’s reason for denying those requests? Romney didn’t want to “overturn a jury.” Romney even denied the pardon request of a decorated Iraq War veteran.

Mitt Romney has a strong stance on crime issues, all of which are completely uncharacteristic of Judge Tuttman’s release of Tavares Jr. Romney would support a “One Strike, You’re Ours” law that would create lifetime GPS tracking for those convicted of preying on children with the Internet. During his 2002 campaign for governor, Romney strongly supported sentencing reform, pledging to enact strong sentencing guidelines and wanted prosecutors to have the right to appeal lenient sentences. Romney is also on the record for supporting the death penalty for convicted first-degree murderers. In his 1994 campaign for the senate, Romney favored mandatory sentencing, “three strikes and you’re out,” wanted to abolish parole, limit probation, end furloughs and release programs for violent or repeat offenders, and supported restrictions on plea bargaining.

Can anyone honestly believe that Mitt Romney would have furloughed, pardoned or commuted the sentence of Daniel Tavares Jr. if he had the choice?

Of course not.

While the person most to blame for Tavares’ behavior is Tavares, the person most deserving of backlash from Tavares’ release is Judge Tuttman. How can a governor be held accountable for the decisions of his appointees, particular when the judge does something completely out of character from the person who appointed him or her to that position?

Romney is calling for Judge Tuttman to answer for her decision to release Tavares.

Perhaps the discussion should include a debate about the rehabilitation of inmates. Let’s be honest here, is it a safe bet to say that Democrats are more likely to support and believe in inmate rehabilitation, while Republicans are less likely (hence why many Republicans support capital punishment, and Democrats not). Sixteen years of prison, some Democrats would argue, could be enough to consider someone “rehabilitated.” Democrats and their supporters are also the ones who will very likely try to use this Tavares case to damage Romney. Of course, if they do that, they will have to answer questions regarding their belief that criminals can be “rehabilitated.”

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Willie Horton occurred in a time before bloggers and the Internet, and Dukakis undoubtedly suffered. Romney’s campaign has been very innovative in its use of the internet, and now would be a good time for his supporters to take full advantage of its power.

It is unfortunate Romney’s appointed judge exercised extremely poor judgment with Tavares Jr., but it’s not Romney’s burden to bear. At the end of the day, I would bet it is Judge Tuttman having trouble sleeping at night over her decision to free Tavares.