Endorsements for the General Election
A List of The Plymouth County Observer's Endorsements in Some Local and State Races
The Plymouth County Observer endorses:
Alex Bezanson for Plymouth County Commissioner.
This publication began as a response to several threats to the Commons in Plymouth County, and the most pressing of them was the absurdly bad proposal to put a casino and/or a horse-racing track on the County Wood Lot in Plymouth, behind Camelot Drive. I worked for Mr. Bezanson’s opponent in the Democratic Primary, Carlos Da Silva, of Hingham; however, both Mr. Da Silva and this publication agree on the importance of voting for a candidate who opposes a casino, and who believes in local democracy over sweetheart deals for fabulously rich corporate mega-developers. Mr. Bezanson is that candidate. He has affirmed, repeatedly and publicly, his view that the People of Plymouth must be the legitimate controlling authority in determining the ultimate fate of the County Wood Lot. Bezanson opposes a casino, and I will cast my vote for him.
2. Josh Cutler For State Representative in the Sixth Plymouth District.
Rep. Cutler, whose district encompasses Hanson, Pembroke, and Duxbury, has been a consistent and hard-working advocate for the interests of our communities [By way of full disclosure, Josh was my very tolerant boss as the 2002 Summer Intern at the Duxbury Clipper]He and the rest of the local delegation have consistently attempted to use legislative means to halt Holtec’s proposed dumping of 1.1 million gallons of radioactive wastewater into Cape Cod Bay. The action is already plainly illegal, but Rep. Cutler and his colleagues were critical in including an amendment to the recently passed economic development bill – it currently is awaiting the Governor’s signature – that will put a two year moratorium on dumping, and will form a commission to report on the economic and environmental consequences of any dumping. This two year delay is critical, because Holtec’s entire business plan is predicated around rapid decommissioning; the longer delays pile up, the more money they lose, and the less economically attractive dumping becomes. This is just one of many reasons that Rep. Cutler ought to be reelected.
3. Kathy LaNatra for State Representative in the 12th Plymouth District.
Rep. LaNatra’s district includes Kingston, Plympton, Halifax, North Plymouth, and pieces of Pembroke and Middleboro. Like Rep. Cutler, Rep. Lanatra has been extremely helpful in terms of using legislative means to attempt to halt Holtec. She has been a consistent and vocal advocate at the various Save Our Bay rallies (full disclosure: I sit on the Steering Committee of Save Our Bay), and worked with the rest of the delegation to secure the language establishing a moratorium and a commission on dumping. Rep. Lanatra has worked hard for her district, and deserves to be reelected.
4. Susan Moran for the Plymouth and Barnstable Senate District.
State Sen. Susan Moran represents a large and diverse district, from Pembroke to Falmouth via Kingston, Plymouth, Bourne, and Sandwich. Sen. Moran has impressed me not only with her critical work inserting language into the economic development bill establishing the dumping moratorium and commission, but also through some of her passionate advocacy in other areas. Her speech at the July, 2022 Rally for Reproductive Freedom in Plymouth was particularly powerful. She deserves to be reelected to the Massachusetts Senate.
5. Rahsaan Hall for Plymouth County District Attorney.
I ran into Attorney Rahsaan Hall on the campaign trail on four separate occasions: the first was at the July 4th Parade in Duxbury, when he was the Save Our Bay float’s near (and cooperative) neighbor; the second was at the Rally for Reproductive Freedom in Plymouth in July ; the third was at Lobster Fest in Green Harbor in mid September; and the fourth on Alex Bezanson’s radio show on WATD in Marshfield in the first part of October. On all four occasions, I was incredibly impressed by Mr. Hall. A former Assistant District Attorney in Suffolk County, and Director of the Racial Justice Program at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, he has run an energetic and ideas-based campaign, arguing that restorative justice and a criminal justice system that works for all is the best fit for Plymouth County. Indeed, Attorney Hall’s speech at the July Reproductive Freedom rally was, without exaggeration, one of the best I have ever heard. I believe he is the right choice for Plymouth County District Attorney.
6. Andrea Campbell for Attorney General.
Boston City Councillor Andrea Campbell visited Island Creek Oysters in Duxbury in July, where I had the opportunity to spend the afternoon with her, oyster farmers Gregg Morris and Chris Sherman, and members of the local delegation, including Reps. Cutler and Meschino. I was incredibly favorably impressed by Ms. Campbell. She instinctively understood the importance of halting Holtec, and agreed with the arguments I advanced (on behalf of Attorney James Lampert, who could not be there) for seeking injunctive relief in this matter. Campbell’s inspiring life story, deep sense of compassion, and willingness to work hard for all people in the Commonwealth make her the right choice for Massachusetts Attorney General.
7. Gubernatorial Ticket – Healey-Driscoll.
Attorney General Maura Healey and Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll will receive my votes for Governor and Lieutenant Governor, respectively. I am very hopeful that in some of the matters which, frankly, Charlie Baker’s Administration has been less than helpful on – and this would include halting Holtec – that a Healey-Driscoll Administration will be far more favorable. I likewise am looking forward to an Administration led by two women, and that, unlike the current one, has a basically favorable view of social democracy and a Commonwealth built for all. I am very hopeful that we will see Maura Healey and Kim Driscoll in charge of the Executive Branch come January.
Ballot Questions:
Question 1: Yes.
Question 1 will amend the Massachusetts Constitution to establish a 4% tax on incomes over 1 million dollars. The first million dollars are exempt, so that it if one were to report 2 million dollars in income, only 40,000 would be paid in taxes. The taxes will go to fund education and transportation. Article 44 of the Massachusetts Constitution, from 1915, allows for the levying of income taxes, but does not allow for different rates of income tax. This would change that, allowing progressive (in the statistical sense) income taxation in the Commonwealth.
I am voting Yes on Question 1. John Adams was right: we cannot have a monied, hereditary aristocracy, and political democracy. It’s one or the other, and Question 1 will tilt things in favor of democracy.
Question 2: Yes.
Question 2 would regulate dental insurance rates, preventing dental insurers from spending an excessive amount on administrative costs rather than actual dental care. I am voting Yes.
Question 3: No.
Question 3 strikes me as essentially an intra-liquor store dispute. It would increase the number of liquor licenses a retailer could possess, as well as allow sales to people with out of state licenses, prohibit self-checkout sales of liquor, and limit the number of “all-alcohol” (as opposed to just beer and wine) liquor licenses that are available. Package stores support it, but chains that want to sell wine and beer oppose it.
Frankly, I don’t think there is any shortage of places to buy alcohol in Massachusetts, so I am voting No.
Question 4: Yes.
Question 4 asks whether voters wish to keep a law that allows undocumented migrants to obtain driver’s licenses. I am voting Yes, because the public safety is increased when all drivers have licenses, and because life for undocumented migrants seems difficult enough without having to worry about getting stopped, arrested, and deported every time they drive on our roads.
These are the races that I thought fit to remark upon. There are more, but these are the ones about which I have had the most to say.