Romney edges Reilly on Big Dig `outrage'

26 November 2004

Let's review, shall we, the reason we elected Mitt Romney governor.

It certainly wasn't his party affiliation - just 13 percent of registered voters are Republicans. Nor was it his political leanings. The governor, for example, is more conservative on social issues than most of us. Could it be his looks? Gender? Wealth? All may have helped, but they hardly explain why Romney won - nor do they explain 14 years of GOP governors in the same place that produced presidential contenders John Kerry, Michael Dukakis and a vote for George McGovern.

The reason Romney got the job is because, in a state where Democratic pols control all, we wanted someone who could act as a check. Poor Shannon O'Brien, with whom most voters probably agreed, lost because she was seen as too close to the insiders. Romney, on the other hand, ran as someone willing to buck the establishment and take on sacred cows wherever they might graze.

So if you were a Democrat contemplating a gubernatorial run in 2006, wouldn't it make sense for you, too, to become a reformer, for you, too, to stand up to politics as usual, for you, too, to take on such hot button issues as, say, leaks in the Big Dig?

Of course.

So how are the Democrats doing? Attorney General Tom Reilly and U.S. Rep. Mike Capuano are the two most oft-mentioned Democrats contemplating a run for governor in 2006. Stuck in Washington, Capuano has a harder time making the front pages. But when he did recently, the results were not encouraging. As news broke about the possibility of thousands of leaks riddling the Big Dig tunnels, Capuano's reaction was to urge everyone to shush it up. "The last thing I need while the Highway Bill is pending (in Congress) is a headline-grabbing investigation," he told a Herald reporter. "Overkill or overreaction is not gonna help me in Washington."

Meanwhile, Romney was going into overkill mode. And Reilly was not far behind.

Both men held press conferences. Both used the word "outrage" a lot. The leaks were an outrage, the seeming cover-up of the leaks was outrageous, and each was personally outraged. Both called for an investigation; Reilly, in fact, will be leading one.

Reilly makes for an intriguing Democrat, if only because other Democrats disdain him so. When Romney demanded the resignation of University of Massachusetts President William M. Bulger, Reilly was the only prominent Democrat to join him. It earned him scorn from party regulars; delegates actually booed when Reilly appeared at the 2003 Democratic Party's state convention. The AG seemed unfazed - and turned out to be right. That's typical of his style: Reilly willingly inserts himself into controversies (such as the Catholic Church's sexual abuse scandal and the misuse of funds by the Yawkey Foundation) and takes tough, against-the-grain stands that months later prove almost prescient.

Still, when it comes to the Big Dig, Reilly is one step behind the governor. Romney understands that angry voters want more than an investigation and more than a heated press conference. They want someone's head. In this case, the governor's chosen victim is Matt Amorello, the former state senator who now runs the project. Reilly meanwhile, has hesitated, arguing it's too early to point fingers.

Reilly's is probably the more responsible position - after all, if he's conducting an investigation, he shouldn't jump to conclusions before the inquiry has even begun. Even Capuano's let's- not-talk-about-it reaction is understandable. He figures that, with $4.8 billion in new transportation money at stake, it's his job to make sure Massachusetts gets the funds.

But good politics isn't always the same as responsible politics. In this round, an early window to an election still two years away, Romney is the winner (should he actually run), Reilly a close second and Capuano a distant third. When it comes to outrage, Romney still does it better.