Op-Ed; Voters not raging or intent on reform

THOMAS M. KEANE JR.
830 words
20 September 2002
Boston Herald
All Editions
035
English
(Copyright 2002)

It turns out we're not that angry after all.

If there was a big theme to Tuesday's gubernatorial contest, it was reform. House Speaker Thomas Finneran was the bogeyman, the Legislature was out of control, and the public good had been corrupted by insider deals and avaricious lobbyists. That, at least, was the message from both Robert Reich and Warren Tolman. The code words of their campaigns were insider and outsider. Being an outsider, of course, was supposed to be a good thing.

State Treasurer Shannon O'Brien and Senate President Thomas Birmingham, meanwhile, were the political professionals, part of that establishment we all supposedly despised. O'Brien, in particular, ran a campaign that in many respects reveled in her insider status. An ally of Finneran's, she never denied that friendship, simply asserting that she would be her own woman if, as governor, she and the speaker disagreed. She avoided the fiery rhetoric of the reformers. Rather than shunning government, she stressed her experience as a legislator and treasurer. Her campaign rested less on the need for a new ideology than it did on the need for better management. The state, she was saying, was basically in good shape. It had problems but did not need a revolution.

Voters agreed with O'Brien. She and Birmingham collectively got 57 percent of the vote, while the two reformers got just 42 percent (Steve Grossman, who had dropped out, got the missing 1 percent). Far from rejecting insiders, voters seemed comfortable with them.

And that theme carried through to other elections. With but two exceptions, no incumbent state senator or representative lost.

The exceptions are notable. Two reps who had opposed Clean Elections lost. One, Dedham's Maryanne Lewis, was a member of Finneran's leadership team.

Reformers have seized on those two defeats as a sign of hope for their cause. Yet from all other corners of the state, the message was clear: We like the status quo.

And that should cause Mitt Romney to worry.

Twelve years ago, Republican William Weld was swept into office riding a surge of voter rage. The economy, two years earlier hyped as the Massachusetts Miracle, was in shambles. The Legislature and then-Gov. Michael Dukakis had approved a much-hated sales tax on services. Voters were mad.

Republicans are hoping that 2002 will be a repeat of 1990. The themes of Romney's campaign so far - that he, too, is a reformer, that he can ride herd on the Legislature - echo those of Weld. But the analogy doesn't hold up. The fury of 1990 can't be found in 2002.

Why not? Because elections are won and lost on basic issues of home and hearth. And when voters think about it, for the most part they're happy.

The 1990s weren't simply a boom time for the stock markets. By almost all major measures, the quality of life improved in Massachusetts. Crime went down, state and local governments focused on street-level issues like parks and playgrounds, and unemployment was low. All of this occurred, of course, on the watch of the very same Legislature that the reform crowd is now decrying.

True, today we're in a recession. But it's mild. As the Federal Reserve Bank noted earlier this month, the state's economy isn't collapsing, rather it's going "sideways." In fact, some sectors, such as housing, continue to go up, meaning homeowners - the ones most likely to vote - are still feeling well off.

Where the recession has been felt, of course, has been in the state's budget. So far, though, voters don't seem disturbed. Part of the reason is the state's rainy day reserve, which has helped ease pressures this year. Part also is that although the Legislature boosted the income-tax rate, that increase was just an offset to an earlier tax-rate decrease. The net effect is that voters' pockets don't feel any lighter.

All of this may change, of course. Next year's state budget imbalance may very well be worse, requiring more cuts and even higher taxes. The national economy is in a fragile state. Unemployment could rise or housing prices collapse.

But as far as November is concerned, that's too far in the future. For now, most people are sanguine. O'Brien - knowledgeable, experienced and part of a system of government that so far has delivered well - is their candidate.

Romney, as evidenced by his direct appeals to disappointed supporters of Reich and Tolman, is counting on people being unhappy. The problem is that those reform candidates lost on Tuesday. There's no particular reason to believe their failed strategy will work for Romney in November.

Tom Keane writes Wednesday and Friday. He's reachable at tomkeane@tomkeane.com.

Caption: SHANNON O'BRIEN: Her campaign revels in insider status.

Document bhld000020020921dy9k0001r