Tom Keane

Scott Brown, time to start the truck

Scott Brown is this state’s once and likely future Senator — the beneficiary, this holiday season, of some striking good fortune.

Brown undoubtedly had a gloomy Thanksgiving; he had, after all, just lost to Elizabeth Warren. But since then, things have brightened. With John Kerry now President Obama’s nominee for secretary of state, another Senate seat should soon be up for grabs. That by itself is good news for Brown. But it was hardly his only political gift this season.

On Christmas Eve came cheery news from Connecticut, residence of one Edward Moore Kennedy Jr., he of his late father’s looks and name. Despite the many Democrats pushing him to jump into the race, Ted Jr. demurred.

Kennedy would have been a field-clearing choice for the Democrats. And make no mistake: He may be untested and even a resident of another state, but if he had entered the race, Kennedy would have won. This is Massachusetts, after all.

Then, just hours after Kennedy’s withdrawal, Brown received another present. Cambridge homey and well-regarded actor-director Ben Affleck revealed — via Facebook, no less — that he too would stay on the sidelines. Affleck wouldn’t have received the same deference as Ted Jr. He probably would have faced a primary, and he might have lost. Still, celebrities have made the leap before — Arnold Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson, Al Franken — and Affleck may one day as well.

But that day isn’t now, and as the year closes, Brown has to be enjoying the sight of potential opponents taking themselves out. Others who could be formidable never signaled even an initial interest in the race. That list includes Victoria Kennedy, wife of the late senator; Governor Deval Patrick; and Attorney General Martha Coakley.

And so, at least for now, the number of plausible candidates has dwindled to just three, all members of Congress: Somerville’s Mike Capuano, Southie’s Steve Lynch, and Malden’s Ed Markey, who has already declared that he’s running.

That might change. There could be some last-minute surprise entrant, à la Warren. Or the Democrats in the Legislature could alter the law, getting rid of the special election, now slated for 145 to 160 days after Kerry leaves, and handing appointment authority to the governor. But if things remain as they are, Scott Brown has to be thinking it’ll be a pretty good 2013.

That’s because special elections are accelerated affairs with lower-than-normal turnout. The beneficiaries of such contests are those who already have statewide name recognition — something none of the congressional candidates can claim. What’s more, Brown, fresh off his last campaign, already has staff and infrastructure ready for another effort. His voter list is still up-to-date. Add to that a nationwide network of donors, and Brown looks formidable.

That’s not to say any of the three congressmen would be pushovers. The Democratic primary process will elevate each contender’s profile, and national Democrats care enough about this race that they may well pour in money. Further, each of the congressional trio has considerable strengths: Capuano’s passion, Lynch’s working-class roots, and Markey’s long experience. Remember, too, that Massachusetts is a deeply blue state, which gives any Democrat a built-in boost.

Having said that, polls suggest this is Brown’s race to lose. Of course, that was also true of his contest against Warren, and he managed to do exactly that. Some of that, of course, was Warren. She recovered from early mistakes and ran a good, ground-based effort. She also benefitted from a surge of support for Obama that was reflected in high voter turnout. Still, much of Brown’s defeat was self-inflicted. He sacrificed considerable goodwill by petty chip-on-the-shoulder politics (e.g., addressing Warren as “professor”). He also failed to present a set of policy prescriptions that went beyond vague niceties about “bipartisanship.”

It’s rare that one has, so quickly, a chance to learn from past mistakes. But if he does learn, Brown will likely find himself truckin’ back to Washington.

This column originally appeared in The Boston Sunday Globe on December 30, 2012.

Last-minute gift guide

Anyone for a Magic 8-Ball (Deval Patrick edition)?

The world was supposed to end Friday, so I held off on my Christmas shopping. Clever me. Why waste the time and money? The cataclysm was supposed to make the whole thing irrelevant. Now, with Armageddon averted and friends and family expecting something under their trees, I’m in a panic. My guess is you’re in the same position as me — I mean, if you can’t believe the Mayans, who can you believe? — and so, herewith, a handy last-minute gift guide.

Rock ’Em Sock ’Em Robots (Senate campaign edition). Wrangling Warren and Brown Bomber battle it out, with realistic sounds (“You’re an Indian!” “You hate women!”) and heart-stopping debate action, replete with grimaces, sighs, and pointed fingers. When Elizabeth Warren finally lands that blockbuster punch, Scott Brown’s finished — or is he? Contents include a national donor network.

The Magic 8-Ball (Deval Patrick edition). Bewildered by the ins and outs of Massachusetts state government? Ask the Magic 8-Ball any question, and it gives you the answer, just as if the governor said it himself!

■ Who hired Sheila Burgess as state highway safety director? Better not tell you now.

■ Will the administration take responsibility for the drug lab scandal? Don’t count on it.

■ What really happened with Tim Murray’s car accident? Reply hazy, try again.

■ Is there another book in the works? You may rely on it.

Twister (politico edition). A reelected president, a bored governor, and a laid-up mayor combine to bring you this exciting game. Senator John Kerry’s going, Cabinet heads are out the door, and Boston pols are salivating over the possible exit of the mayor. Whose foot is where? It all adds up to one mad-cap scramble as aspiring wannabes clamber over each other for a new spot. Once the game ends, they’re all better off but somehow you’re not!

Powerball tickets (Red Sox edition). When will the Fenway Park sell-out streak end? Lottery tickets are now available for the 2013 season. Try your luck! The cold weeks of April? Could be. The dog days of summer? You’d think so. But “sold-out” is in the eyes of the owners and the grand prize in any event is a pile of tickets to a game no one wants to go to anyway.

The Game of Life (fiscal cliff edition). Where will your choices take you? You’re born, you die, and in between only two things are inevitable: spending and taxes. Good deeds get you rewards — recycle and you get a tax credit! But bad deeds get rewards too: Deduct that Cadillac as a home office. But beware of perils on the way. With one errant roll of the dice, marauding Tea Partiers try to take away your health care, Social Security, and Medicare. Next play, wacko liberals are grabbing for everything you earn. Defeat them both and you win — as long as you can find someone else to pay the bill!

Super Soaker (tax edition). The original Super Soaker was a classic — sales taxes, income taxes, local options, and property taxes. It’s the stuff that made Massachusetts Taxachusetts. Yet as good as it was, the Soaker missed on occasion. This year’s model is new and improved, with extra reach and even fewer loopholes! Hoping to avoid that 6.25 percent by shopping at Amazon? Come November — ha ha, got ya!

Lego (developer’s edition). The 2013 edition of Lego is bigger than ever — more bricks, more glass, more cranes, and more neighbors than ever protesting every new project that comes along. NIMBYism used to kill them but, don’tcha know, we’ve got an economy that needs to rebound so build, build, build to your heart’s content! Comes complete with keys to the city and a rubber stamp of approval.

Cabbage Patch Kids (homeless edition). The poor, homeless Cabbage Patch kids and their moms and dads need our help and every Christmas season politicians heed the call. They rush to shelters and soup kitchens, pitching in to do their best — at least until the reporters and cameras go home!

Of course, if none of these tickles your fancy, there’s always cash. Just make sure (see, e.g., Chuck Turner, Diane Wilkerson, and Sal DiMasi) that you really are a Secret Santa when you do . . .

This column originally appeared in The Boston Globe on December 22, 2012.

Act on marriage

The Supreme Court has the opportunity to advance human rights

When boozed-up pop star Britney Spears married Jason Allen Alexander in Las Vegas several years ago, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts acknowledged the validity of their union — all 55 hours of it. It may have been an ill-advised and ill-considered act of stupidity — a fraud, in fact — but if Nevada said it was OK, that was good enough for the Bay State.

On the other hand, if a married same-sex couple from Boston were to travel to Nevada, their marriage — no matter how soberly entered into, no matter its length or commitment — would be unrecognized. What is good enough for Massachusetts is not good enough for Nevada.

The same is true at the national level. If Spears and Alexander’s marriage had lasted long enough for them to file their taxes, they could have filed jointly. Not so with a married same-sex couple. The Defense of Marriage Act — signed by Bill Clinton, of all people! — stops that, denying federal recognition of their marriage, and letting states do the same.

It’s an untenable state of affairs, the kind of conflict among the various states and the federal government that demands resolution — meaning, eventually, the US Supreme Court gets involved. And so with its decision to hear two cases (one on California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriages, and the other a challenge to DOMA), in 2013 it likely will. What unfolds could well be one of those rare, exceptionally consequential moments in American history, on par with the civil rights cases that culminated in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 — or perhaps, more grimly, 1857’s Dred Scott decision.

You knew it had to come to this. Nine years ago, in Goodridge v. Department of Health, Massachusetts’ highest court declared same-sex marriage a constitutional right. The Commonwealth was an outlier then. Today, the novelty of that decision has worn off. Eight other states and the District of Columbia now offer same-sex marriage. A solid majority of Americans support the idea, and approval ratings are even higher among those who are younger, suggesting a real generational change. Concerns that same-sex marriages would somehow undermine conventional marriages haven’t materialized. And hesitant politicians, once fearful that anything gay was electoral death, are now coming around (proving once again that politics is less about leadership than it is about deftly figuring out where the masses are heading).

With the new year, the two cases will doubtless become a national preoccupation, in much the way that the court’s hearings on health care reform absorbed our attention last spring. Having said that, it’s quite possible the Supreme Court just punts. There are a lot of ways to do this — rule so narrowly that the cases don’t carry much precedent, find a technical reason to dismiss them, or just send them down to lower courts to mull over other issues.

Assuming the court does rule on the merits, however, it could go many directions. It could simply read the “equal protection” language of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution as prohibiting discrimination, and proclaim marriage equality, much as happened in Massachusetts. Or it could go halfway, leaving the definition of marriage up to individual states, while at the same time requiring that they (and the federal government) recognize the validity of other states’ marriages, be they straight or gay.

On the other hand, some fear that these cases come too soon, that the notion of same-sex marriage is still too new and its support too fragile. Far more states ban gays from marrying than permit it, for example. The court might actually uphold DOMA. It might even seek to ban same-sex unions altogether.

I don’t think this will happen. Granted, the Supreme Court’s composition is far more conservative than was the court in Massachusetts. But judges understand the power they have not only to clarify laws, but to change public opinion. One wonders whether, absent Brown, segregation might still persist in the United States and whether, absent Goodridge, a sitting president would have ever declared his support for same-sex marriage. The moments that courts have historically rued have come about when they denied human rights, not advanced them. In the coming months, such thoughts will weigh heavily on the minds of nine men and women.

This column originally appeared in The Boston Sunday Globe on December 16, 2012.

Don't count out Menino

TOM MENINO is getting the bum’s rush, an unceremonious push out the door on account of a newly identified case of Type 2 diabetes. The chattering classes — those who write about politics and those who just talk about it over a beer — seem almost thrilled by the mayor’s recent ailments, eagerly spinning out scenarios for his succession. Elections can’t dislodge the guy. The hope, apparently, is that illness will.

The 69-year-old Menino has suffered of late from a number of seemingly unrelated medical problems. After a month in the hospital — he’s now in rehab — his doctors linked the health issues to a newly emergent case of diabetes. With that diagnosis, the mayor joins a large crowd: About 8.3 percent of Americans — roughly 26 million. Even for older adults, the disease is far from debilitating, however, with Type 2 manageable largely through diet and exercise. Among well-known diabetics are the late Soviet strongman Nikita Khrushchev (no comparison intended, Mr. Mayor!) and lithe actress Halle Berry (definitely no comparison, Mr. Mayor), as well as folks such as artist Shepherd Fairey, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, boy band member Nick Jonas, and professional golfer Michelle McGann.

Menino’s doctors say they expect him to recover and soon be back on the job. They may be wrong in that, or perhaps they’re not telling us all they know. But assuming what’s in the public realm is correct, then one would have thought the commentary surrounding the mayor’s illness might have been a combination of best wishes and some degree of marvel that City Hall continues to run as well as it does.

Instead, the cries mount for Menino to leave. Let’s face it: This isn’t about the mayor’s health. It’s about wanting someone else to get the job.

Menino became mayor in July 1993 when then-mayor Ray Flynn left to become ambassador to the Vatican. He won outright that November and has never looked back. Four years later, he was unopposed. In 2001, he faced a challenge from Councilor Peggy Davis-Mullen and crushed her, getting 76 percent of the vote. In 2005, another councilor, Maura Hennigan, took a shot. Menino got 67 percent. In 2009, yet another councilor, Michael Flaherty, tried his luck. Menino won with 57 percent.

There’s a pattern here — Menino has dropped about 10 points with each election — and simple math might suggest next time he loses with just 47 percent of the vote. Beware of simple math. Menino has faced some tough challengers, particularly with Flaherty and Hennigan. But the outcome of none of those elections has ever been in doubt, for a straightforward reason: Finding an issue that could bring him down is nearly impossible.

Partly that’s because there are few “issues” per se. The great ideological struggles of our day are now fought at the national or state level. City politics have become less philosophical and more practical, focused on concerns such as development, crime, and potholes. Menino has largely figured out how to deliver on all fronts, deftly threading his way between competing interests (real estate developers versus neighborhood activists, for example) and building a bureaucracy attentive to delivering everyday services. Combine that with a remarkable ability to reinvent himself (Hubway, food trucks, and, most recently, mobile city halls) and deep ties to the city’s neighborhoods, and you have a politician who’s hard to beat.

That’s not to say he’s invulnerable to critique. Outsiders find it hard to win his favor. And the mayor has been too cautious about school reform and too slow to adopt innovative practices such as competing out city services. But so far those who have run against him have done so by trying to curry favor with the city’s unions, meaning that they would go in the exact opposite direction — tamping down, not accelerating, any change.

Sure, it’s been 19 years — a long time to be mayor. But longevity is no sin, nor is it credible to argue that someone else “deserves” a chance. Want Menino gone? Vote against him. I expect — if his doctors’ prognosis is right and Menino still wants the job – that next November you’ll have the chance to do so. I also expect, come January 2014, that he’ll be taking the oath for a sixth term.

This column originally appeared in The Boston Sunday Globe on December 9, 2012.

The energy glut

The US is on track to be the world's largest oil producer, with far-ranging implications

The United States is soon to be awash in oil and natural gas, positively brimming with the stuff whose scarcity and unreliability of supply has plagued us since the end of World War II. It is a remarkable, stunning turn of events — largely unforeseen just a few years ago yet now an imminent although still hard-to-believe reality. And the implications of this new reality will be dramatic too — almost all of them positive although not without some risks. Remember when the United States once trembled at the power of OPEC? In a short while, we may be running the thing.

Last month the well-respected International Energy Agency declared, “A new global energy landscape is emerging . . . redrawn by the resurgence in oil and gas production in the United States.” Within eight years, the America is expected to be the planet’s largest producer of oil. By 2030, we’ll be producing more than we need — exporting, not importing. The reason is technology. Techniques such as hydraulic fracturing have been invented and improved so that they can now economically unlock the vast stores of oil and natural gas across the middle of the country. The flyover states may finally start getting some respect.

It’s uncomfortable to admit this, but Sarah Palin had a point: The key to American energy independence is “drill, baby, drill” — or perhaps more correctly, “frack, baby, frack.”

Don’t count on this abundance making for cheaper gasoline, however. Oil is a global commodity, and, unless the United States decided to subsidize its price, it will still sell to the highest bidder. Nevertheless, the fears of supply disruptions and embargoes — remember the gas lines of 1973? — will largely disappear. Should some country decide to block the Strait of Hormuz, it’ll be other nations, not the United States, feeling the pain. (US law currently prohibits us from exporting oil. Even though it likely will be changed, we’ll still make sure our domestic needs are met first before shipping overseas.)

On the other hand, these newfound supplies may get us a cheaper military budget. Why is the United States so deeply involved in the Middle East but not in, say, Africa? Oil. For at least the last 60 years, its constant supply has been a paramount worry: without energy, the economy collapses. But that policy, while necessary, cost us blood, treasure, and integrity. Too often, we sacrificed our ideals to support a local strongman who could keep pipelines safe. And the wars, both far afield as well as attacks on our soil, have been a burden.

What happens when we no longer need Middle East oil? Foreign policy changes. Conflict is reduced, and our goals can, one hopes, become principled — less tarnished by economic exigencies, more focused on human rights.

There will be dramatic changes at home too. The states with oil reserves will see a huge bump in their economies (already shale-rich North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country). The entire nation’s economy will benefit too. With energy supplies and prices abundant and stable, business will thrive.

There are risks, two of which are obvious. Fracking can contaminate underground water supplies (and uses lots of water to boot). That’s an issue of smart regulation, however. We already take huge risks with offshore drilling — BP oil, for example. Fracking’s potential impact is arguably less risky and also more manageable.

The other has to do with global climate change. The scarcity of oil (“peak oil” — the theory that supplies are about to diminish — is now, at least for this century, largely kaput) had the beneficial effect of driving us toward conservation and cleaner energy. With a glut of petrochemicals, will that push stop, causing greenhouse gas emissions to worsen? Possibly but not necessarily. The natural gas being extracted by fracking is actually cleaner than oil. Then too, every barrel of oil saved by conservation or alternative energy is a barrel sold overseas — meaning there’s an economic incentive for using renewables.

Those risks notwithstanding, our new world of energy should be a cause of great optimism. Many fear our time is over; the Great American Century finished. The renaissance of domestic oil and gas are of such magnitude, though, it may be another Great American Century is about to begin.

This column originally appeared in the Boston Sunday Globe on December 2, 2012.