Jobs, education, and welfare reform. That’s the triumvirate of issues that undergird Charlie Baker’s gubernatorial run, the three that appear over and over in his television ads. Jobs and education I get. But welfare reform? Does that really excite voters? Indeed, didn’t we pass reforms earlier this year? And more to the point, Baker’s campaign seems to be ignoring the most compelling reason to get him elected, the one that could really move votes: Someone’s got to fend off the foxes lurking around the chicken coop.
The Bay State’s biggest political problem is the utter dominance of one party. Of the 160-member House, 131 are Democrats. In the 40-member Senate, there are only four Republicans. For the last four years, all six statewide constitutional offices — governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, treasurer, secretary of state, and auditor — have been held by a Democrat. And to boot, both US senators and all nine US representatives are Democrats.
Nor — with the possible exception of governor (and, naturally, lieutenant governor) — is that likely to change. After next week’s election, it’s a sure thing the legislature will remain overwhelmingly Democratic. There are Republicans on the ballot for attorney general, treasurer, secretary of state, and auditor — but recent polling shows them far behind. Democratic US Senator Ed Markey, up for reelection, will win easily. And, barring a surprise in the Moulton-Tisei fight for the sixth congressional district, the Massachusetts delegation to the House will also remain true blue.
Don’t get me wrong. Massachusetts’ politicians are, almost without exception, good people. They care about their jobs, work hard and try to do what’s right. But when one party has all of the power, everyone becomes an insider, creating a closed political culture that can breed scandal (the Probation Department, the Department of Children and Families, and the state drug labs) and complacency. The status quo becomes comfortable with itself, and new ideas, especially those that upset established interests, are shunted aside. Government becomes slothful and less efficient, delivering less while spending more.
An effective two-party system is an antidote. A clash of interests and checks on power force a higher degree of openness, truth, and innovation. Voters get this. That’s why there’s been a long history of Republican governors getting elected despite Democrats winning most other offices. Bill Weld, Paul Cellucci, Jane Swift (albeit, unelected), and Mitt Romney marked a 16-year string of such ballot-splitting.
So why wouldn’t a Republican running for office this time around make the same case?
Because, I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Charlie Baker is, in fact, a Republican. But then again, you probably haven’t heard — or at least you haven’t heard it from him: Baker rarely mentions it. His ads talk about a lot of things but not his party affiliation. (The only way to tell perhaps, is the red colors his campaign features.) The bio on his website notes he is a “Republican candidate,” but that’s about it.
And this shyness about his affiliation makes his advertisements a little curious. Many are gauzy, filled with heartwarming stories about his commitment to his family, his forthright support for his brother, Alex, when he came out, his success in state government, and his equal success turning around Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare. Welfare reform aside, the tougher ads mostly trumpet a litany of familiar Democratic themes including, over and over and over, that he’s pro-choice. The idea that Baker is actually not a Democrat is mentioned only elliptically: He speaks of his bipartisan nature, his support from Democrats and independents, and his enthusiasm for new ideas and creative approaches.
Of course, we all know why. Even as Democrats are on the ropes elsewhere, locally the GOP is anathema. It’s the national party’s fault. As it continues to veer evermore towards the extreme, increasingly intransigent and seemingly more concerned with bringing down a president than building up a nation, it further alienates Massachusetts moderates that, in a tight race, are the key to a gubernatorial victory. Thus we see Baker largely unable or unwilling to put forward the best case to make himself governor. In the Bay State, at least, Republican is the new word that dare not speak its name.
This column originally appeared in The Boston Sunday Globe on October 26, 2014.