CapeCodToday Blog Chowder

Before everyone runs off and gets in lock step with general dogma, let me point out that this guy has a record serving as a Selectman, a State Rep and a State Senator. You might want to see what he's actually done and what he, specifically, stands for before you get reflexive.

The reason we are in this mess is that Washington has plenty of crooks and ideologues from both sides of the aisle who are more interested in PACs money and dogma than in serving you and I (and that means everyone, not just you or I)

There is, indeed, no discernible value system on the part of the current Board of Selectmen when viewed from the outside. But that is not because there is no value system, as such. Indeed, to at least two of the current Board, it is all about power. But interestingly, it's not about what to do with that power; just its accumulation.

With a valuable cultural asset (the old Rec building) seemingly hanging on a thread for years (certainly for many years while I served), the Town woefully short of affordable housing, our environment threatened in historic (and possibly irreversible) ways, and the Town heading towards its biggest fiscal crisis ever, the only passion the two aforementioned members have is the forced removal of one of the BOS's current members. People inside Town Hall have recounted that one of these guys even has said words to the effect "I think we can make him complete his resignation!"

Sadly, it's not a lack of values that is problematic, just a value system that it foreign to many of us. You are right, though, about grass roots Harwich.

Keep up the good work!

Monpo brings up the best point of all (and I sure you intended to, wink wink). A so-called local option tax implies that the state is merely ratifying a local tax; it's collected by us and available to us. But remember, we have to send this money to the State in order for them to send it back, right? Well, the Lottery turns out to be a great example.

During the State's last crisis, they just stopped sending the Lottery money generated by each Town back to that Town. (Note: actually, the "formula" the state uses for Lottery disbursements allows at least one Town which does not sell the tickets to enjoy the revenue - a topic for another time).

What makes anyone believe that once the State adopts such a tax that we will even see the money when (not if) they have their next crisis?

Richard,
"...maybe I'm wrong about how business is done in Harwich..." Now you're starting to get it!

The rooms tax expansion has been bouncing around for several years. The Article only asked the Legislature to pass it as a Home Rule request. It has no date scheduled for consideration and would need another vote of yet another Town Meeting to actually excercise the Tax. It would have done nothing for the upcoming budget year. It was done this way to make it look like we (the citizens) were asking the legislature to expand these taxes; no one on Beacon Hill has wanted to look like they were imposing new taxes these past two years. Indeed, the story circulating here is that Rep. Peake asked for this to use as leverage in Boston precisely because the Rooms Tax Bill has gone nowhere.

And so you know, many Town employees considered me a good friend because I dealt with them honestly. As no current Selectman has talked of layoffs or an override, this action wasn't designed to help the employees. We just spent $6000 for nothing. Just the way we do things here in Harwich.

Richard,
You are quite right, people do have a responsibility to participate in the democratic process. However, there are two flaws in what you say. First, Harwich, Chatham and Brewster have a population containing nearly 40% of citizens over 65 (Orleans' population is not just the oldest population in the state, but in the country). Even though I was the loudest voice for many years prodding Harwich to develp a comprehensive website, I nonetheless know many seniors who don't own a computer or know how to get email. Democracy is not just for the young, the technically proficient, or the clever; everyone is born with those inalienable rights.

One of the hardest things I had to keep remembering was that it wasn't MY government. I was just there to keep an eye on things and to represent. Which brings me to my main point again (one which you continue to miss); there was absolutely nothing urgent on this warrant. Everything could have waited until the May Town Meeting. Instead, we have an oddly timed winter meeting never before experienced in such circumstances. Again, why the rush?

Richard,
I was a Selectman for six years in the same Harwich we are talking about (two as its chair). I understand what you're saying about tough choices. In fact, our town had a failed override a few years ago and the citizens petitioned for a scaled down choice while I was the Board Chair. I was instrumental in scheduling a Saturday Special Town Meeting in August. The turnout was the largest in modern history with people overflowing to two extra rooms where we had set up TV screens and vote tally personnel. This Town meeting was not due to impending layoffs and was extraordinary by any measure. Due to (and this is being polite) a laid back publicity campaign, many people left in January with little or no awareness of the impending meeting. We didn't put up any signs in Town until a week ago. And this meeting was not to pass urgently needed funding for this year (which, according to these same Town officials, needs no override), but rather to provide impetus in the State Legislature to pass legislation to add to current taxes. I still say: do it in daylight

Yeah, but this takes it one step further. We are banking that no one will even know it happened by scheduling it in mid winter. What's next? Are we going to hold the next one at 2:00 am and post it at midnight? If you happen to drve by and notice the lights on, you'll know there's a meeting!

I tried bringing up some of these issues when I ran and got hammered. First, the Cape is not wanting in smart kids due to a lack of "bigness" in it's schools. My daughter graduated from Harwich and went on to graduate from Fordham University cum laude carrying two majors (math and psychology). She's not coming back. There are plenty more just like her.

My other daughter got married and left (finding that her husband kept more money after taxes in CT than here - more stuff to do, too).

The point is the the STATE (not just the Cape) is losing its young people. I know this from raising my own kids, from working with other kids and, oh, Northeastern did a study three years ago that quantified this phenomenon.

The Cape adds to the state's woes in that there is no way to get around without a car, there is no way to afford to live here at the average wage for a younger worker and it lacks the diversity an urban environment can offer.

To start, we need to be looking at better jobs that don't just support the elderly or the tourist economy, allowing workers to earn a real living

"The hate has been damaging, and deliberately so.
It's hard to erase. Or forgive."

Let it go!


There was (and continues to be) negativism on both sides. I can't tell you how many Democratic commercials in different races (up to and icluding Obama's priceless rearview mirror ad) featured Bush's face superimposed next to a candidate's. Boy, Bush must have had a lot of close friends who always agreed with him (if you believe the voice overs).

And Rush and his ilk continue to snipe in the other direction.

The point is, I need to see evidence that we are working together, not just sanctimonious words. That would include bi-partisan appointments and a real plan (change, in and of itself, is not a plan; the Depression was a change from our previous circumstances).

So, what do you say? Let's start talking about what we would LIKE to see happen next. But I only want to hear psitive thoughts.

This partisan ranting isn't the answer to anything; there's plenty of bipartisan blame to go around.

I remember when Clinton proposed and passed banking "reform". That action dismantled one of the most important safeguards enacted in the aftermath of the Great Depression by allowing banks to once again combine with insurance companies and brokerage houses (and took away most regulatory oversight by state banking commissions).

Likewise, Bush has presided over the largest explosion of Federal growth and influence ever. So much for small government Republicanism.

All the while, both parties argued over social agendas.

We need to get serious and somehow adress a problem festering under 5 Presidents and 3 changes in Congressional leadership. As far back as Paul Volcker, there have been periodic clandestine meetings with "power brokers" (like Walter Wriston) to address the near collapse of the financial system. Sound familiar?

We've all got some major problems to address and bickering and delaying will only make the solutions harder to come by.

Note: I wrote this piece several weeks ago and wanted to share it prior to Nov. 4th (election day) so it would not be framed by a win or a loss.

possee,

Your obersvations are correct, as far as they go. Ironically, McCain has found himself running with $88 million as a cap (because he ran under Federal matching funds), while Obama didn't accept them and stands ready to spend (by most reports) approx. $400 million. That probably means no one will accept Federal matching funds (and their restrictions) the next time out.

As for the local and state elections, they are NOT governrd by Federal cmapign law. That's good news and bad news. The bad news is that these finances can be even murkier. And yes, candidates can take their campaign money and stretch it (legally) in almost unimaginable ways (although my fund is caught up in debt - to me - which will probably never be paid back). As an example, in my race, Peake used money from her campaign account (some of it FROM PAC's) and donated it - not her own money - to other PAC's (like $500 to the Hook Fishermen's Association). That's all legal.

The good news - we can attack this kind of excess at the State level without Federal laws. I believe we need to start somewhere.

One final thought,
The intro paragraphs to my posting did not come from me, nor did I include the YouTube video. The quote was from a Globe article. They're not my words, but they do speak to where THEY believe the investigation will lead. THEY assert that the corruption is systemic.

The next quote came from a Herald article pointing out Sal DiMasi's ethics woes. This is the same Sal-pal that Peake has been bragging about having a connection with. He was good enough to host a fundraiser for her in Truro. THEIR reporters are asserting that there is a systemic problem.

I have many Democrat friends. They are ethical, solid people who stand for something. Peake is not among that group. One story illustrates the depth of her committment (because I have seen the same scenario with her over and over); a couple of weeks ago there was a walk in Harwich for Alzheimer's. As my wife's mom died of it, I walked - many R's and D's did. Peake, who was supposed to give an opening speech, showed up at the end with a photographer and proceeded to hug walkers for the camera. She missed the walk.

Democrant,
I can't help it if you don't like my issues, but I have them. I have worked to build affordable housing, set up programs for kids, set up a plan (and followed it to its conclusion as a Selectman) to buy some of the largest tracts of open space this Town has ever bought. I televised Town budget meetings with schools, police and fire (never done before, or since) so that the public could see what went on. I have been a member of Masspirg (and before that, NJpirg) for nearly three decades. I have a background prevailing against stiff odds. And I have a background in Economics. I happen to feel that we are about to face one of the biggest recessions (potentially world-wide) in the nation's history. The only recognition my opponent has given this pending calamity is that we might not get as much local aid for a year or two and maybe we should have a hiring freeze! She has never worked with the other side of the aisle. And she's propably mad (as you are) that I wouldn't just sit there and take the smearing she has directed at me just as she did to Shirley Gomes and Aaron Maloy.

possee,
There are different kinds of being on the take; some legal, some not. I do not agree, that it has always been this way or that it has to be. When I can be told by several organizations (for whom I have been actively working for years - as opposed to showing up for ribbon cuttings) that they cannot afford to p..s off my opponent because of incumbency, something needs to change. Despite Demo's cranting, I have offered positions. He just doesn't embrace them. I believe we need to send all PAC money through a candidate's OCPF reporting system, too. When it is all said and done, the value of Peake's campaign will likely be 6 figures (for a $50k a year job). Nearly all of her card mailings were paid by the PAC's, not her campaign - so you'll never see their value (at least on the candidate's site). And she'll have spent 10 times what I did. This can be turned around and term limits is a good place to start. Subjecting the legislature to its own Open Meeting Law is another. Giving up only gives us the government we, um, THEY pay for. It's not about voting for the worse of two evils

possee,
"...take the time to research your beloved candidates...?"

"...free, unaccountable cash...?"

Hey, maybe you're on to something. Somebody should run for some office and try to offer something different.

Naw, people would just say that you should stick to real issues, cause that's just the way things are.

You need to keep this to yourself, but I heard "Yes" in under investigation and, therefore, is not to be trusted. "No", on the other hand, has been linked to known contrarians and couldn't be counted on to serve its purpose. I'm thinking Maybe, just Maybe...

You need to check the news today. Yes, the governor is proposing to use up pretty much all that is left of the fund (it started at 1.6 billion, but Sarah and I were in agreement about 2 weeks ago that about 500 million was all that was available).
As for the latter point, my opponent courted the relationships with leadership, so much so that Sal (who is indeed under ivestigation - a point you have ignored) hosted a posh fundraiser for her at the Vineyard in Truro. Then there's the issue of all those PAC's. Are you arguing that all is well? Or are you arguing that holding 141 out of 160 seats is healthy (I say that even if they were "R" seats it would unhealthy)? If not, which ones should go in your mind? Should public business be conducted behind closed doors (as it now is in the party caucus held by those 141 members)? And why didn't Rep Peake want to post committee votes on the net? Final thought; the County government (including the Dems) are moving to open up gov't by televising Commissioners' meetings. Whatever party, if you are not committed to openess, you should go.

Democrant,
You know what is beneath contempt? Accepting these corrupt arrangements. I notice you have not weighed in on 30+ year Representatives, fraudulent open session votes (I've been in the chamber numerous times; you mean to assert that no one noticed that such bogus votes were going on?)or on the volume of her raised money (or the fact that about 40% of it doesn't even come from within the district). Perhaps you missed three debates where Sarah made this an issue by bragging that she could be more effective precisely because of her close relationship with leadership. Perhaps you missed the fact that I have been framing this election since early spring not only about accountability (making all this relevant) but also about the economy. You may wish to note that for the past two years, all branches of government have been run by one party. We have blown through our "rainy day" fund and the worst of the recession hasn't even hit. Peake's only plan for all of this was a hiring freeze (hear for yourself on NPR). Also, why do business organizations find Peake so hostile to business?

By the By, how's that insurance thing going? It's been a big problem for years yet there is no solution, despite the fact that your party controls 88% of the House (141 out of 160), a similar percentage in the Senate and the Governor's Office. Sarah touts her friendship with Leadership as a reason to vote for her. So what's stopping the reform? It certainly can't be the "homophobe Republicans." You're not trading any of the things that matter to most Cape Codders with me as your Representative, except for the insider, boss politician thing and the angry hangers-on. I have a record working for the Environment, Housing, Education and Health Care, to name but a few. The plight of the small business owner (the backbone of the Lower Cape) is a matter of great concern to me. Maybe Sarah would join me in supporting terms limits to bring real reform to this corrupt dinosaur of a state. The way I look at it, we ALL deserve a voice.

To continue, I personally offered Sarah a Board position on the Cape Cod Selectmen's Association in her first year of her first term, but was turned down because she said she was already planning on running for State Rep and would be too busy (to actually do any real work, I suppose). As for your easy way with tossing out civil rights barbs, exactly what do you mean about Homophobe? Is that where you go when you have no argument; insults? FYI, MassEquality endorsed me in the last primary race. At a far greater political risk than Sarah ever took, my board (with me as Board Chair) voted to support gay marriage when it meant something (years ago). I authored that letter and took a huge hit from many in my party (and I knew I probably would at the outset). Speaking of Sarah's work ethic, she's "in all the right places, with all the right people." She seems event driven; a celebrity. But I have never seen her at two in the morning or in hours of blazing heat working for causes she believes in. I have seen her with Mayor Menino on Cape (why was he here?). I do what I do because I care.

Hi Robbob. Apart from the fact that you are quite possibly an active supporter of Sarah's, you raise two points which deserve comment. First "Sarah Peake's hard work...??" I will handle this in more detail in an upcoming blog, but Sarah has, through the years, taken copious credit for other people's work (and did so in her run against Shirley Gomes). The Legislation itself was a godsend and I would have sponsored it, too, as a former member of my Town's Water Quality Task Force and a Selectman who enthusiastically supported the County Waste Water Collaborative. Andrew Gottlieb (of the County) wrote the Legislation and Rob O'Leary (to his credit) took the lead in the Legislature. Sarah did, in fact, sponsor it in the House. So, for that she deserves credit. Of course, she also County bashed in her own Selectmen days, so there's a mixed message there. Again, we were colleagues as Selectmen (actually I had seniority and was President of the Selectmen's Association when Sarah was a Freshman).

But Right Guy Monpo! Unless you want the twin emperors, Lance and Bernardo, Brad's a real steady guy.
Don

To continue, Wavemaker, as it stands, these two "reminders" are on the state site 1)All information obtained from this source should be checked against a printed copy of the official version of the House Journal which may be obtained from the Legislative Document Room, State House, Room 428, Boston, MA 02133 and 2) Please put in the number you are looking for and add the roll call # to the zeroes in the form to make a five digit number (i.e., 00123) This will return the available PDF document for viewing. The current system for the public is so simple that the Legislators have one they devised for their own internal use which lets them put in the Legislator’s name to get all their votes (possibly because they work so hard, they can’t remember how they voted).

How come we can’t get what they give themselves?

Hi Wavemaker, Thanks for the follow up. I didn't mean to mislead anyone, so the more extended version is as follows. If you know the date of a particular vote and are willing to wait weeks, if not months, to view such results, this "system" works just fine. It cannot get results by key words, nor by the subject matter of the bill, nor by the name of the Legislator (all pretty important if you wish to track what your own Legislator is up to, or are interested in particular areas like housing or the environment).

I understand the focus on this one guy, but there is a lot more to come in future posts. For instance why did homeowners' insurance reform take a back seat to transgender rights and the repeal of the 1913 Law? Most Cape Codders pay as much (or more) for their insurance as they pay in property taxes. The Legislature has a fossilized leadership, PACs control much of the agenda, and the votes of our Representatives are deliberately obscured (if, indeed, they were even present when their "votes" were cast). This is only the beginning of the discussion, not its entire focus. Stay tuned.

Yeah, Buzz, except that the guy I'm talking about works more than two jobs, has young kids, drives an old car and feels that the government is using him as a never ending checking account. Sorry that the facts have gotten in the way. The point I was trying to make wasn't that he wanted to run up credit debt and walk away from it. He (and others like him across the Lower Cape) only wants to take care of his family and is willing to work to do it. Try to remember that the money the government is taking was earned by him in the first place. Why should he feel guilty questioning how it is prioritized and how much is spent? As a matter of interest, are you old enough to remember that the income tax here is just "temporary"? Surely you know that just a few years ago the good folks of the state (from whom the money is taken) voted to roll back the income tax to 5%. The Legislature ignored that vote; it now stands at 5.3%. The House Speaker is on record as saying that he will simply vote back the income tax if its abolition passes this November (it's on the ballot). This is democracy?

possee,
I believe you have hit upon the subject areas of my next seven weekly blogs. Patience, we will all examine who's doing what.
Thanks for the comments - anyone else feel provoked?

By the by, Andy, the Log Cabin Republicans NEVER sent an invite to me. You should speak to your own experience and the matter at hand. It would become you more. Which reminds me, I wouldn't expect two extremist candidates to be crbbing from me. You are PROUD of that somehow (if indeed they listened to any of us)? Indeed, Ray, Ron, (even) Sarah and I have spoken about these locally and at the local, county and state levels for years. We, of course, differ as to how to accomplish goals. But, none of us saw you anywhere until this past spring. Cheers.

You may also call the Chair of the Lower Cape Republican Council, Pat Klammer, at 508-432-2963. The Roundup is sponsored by the Lower Cape Republican Council.

Walter,
You need to go back and read old Cape Cod Times editions or talk to Kevin Dennehy. I was the first candidate by a long shot. In fact, Aaron's campaign manager, Justine, was in the paper (Political Notes) for hosting a small gathering of religious right extremists in her house in early 2005. The purpose of that meeting? Find a Right-to-Life Republican to run against me to uphold "traditional Republican values." It was probably only a coincidence that Justine's former Middle School pupil entered the race to challenge me shortly thereafter.

Washashore clearly is a shill; and still is hiding. As for my town, glad you brought that up. You're only as good as the team (the town puts) around you. I suppose you could blame the Republicans for what the Democratically controlled legislature has wrought, too. Here's a little math about Harwich: 18 years, 21 Selectmen, 1 Town Administrator. As for Andy's fiscal prowess; 12 months, 1 budget, same good manager before and after. If you really believe that Selectmen set policy and don't run the day to day management (and I do), where do you come off with your comment? For the record, I personally recruited our Town's highly regarded CFO - you should ask him about his choices should you not believe me. I also took a stand about not renewing the previous Administrator's contract (he says it, not me). Moreover, one of the biggest failures on the Board of all time is backing this guy. As for tooting my own horn, well at least I have something that I can talk about. For most of the past 15 years, I have done so in oblivion. By the way, washashore, who are YOU and what have You ever done?

"Not even a good American?" The point about Chatham was that the money for school choice comes from some taxpayer somewhere - it's not free. I happen to love Billy Joel, I just don't want us to become a rich person's playground. But "not even a good American?" Let's see, I use my name, I've stood up for family values by actually practicing them, I've sacrificed the better part of a decade and a half on volunteer endeavors, I've served for six years in elective office... Whereas you hide in anonymity. Yeah, I agree, you are stupid.

Sorry Monpo, the net proceeds would still go to the housing cause and we'd still wind up with cheap t-shirts.

Any questions directed to other candidates will have to be answered by other candidates. The point is, after this whole thing is over, someone gets to represent and govern you. It's not about stories or slogans, but trust. So I'll repeat the answer to the (two part) question which pertained to me.

NARAL Pro-Choice DID endorse me, but they don't own me (particularly in light of their $7.00 in-kind donation). And this is how I got their endorsement: To me, freedom and liberty are not granted by governments, we are born with them. People need to be able to make their private choices privately. Sometimes that will mean your neighbor will make different choices than you or I. But it is your neighbor who is responsible for his or her own choice, not you or I. In fact, while we are both pro-choice, my wife and I chose to foster and adopt two neglected children. How many people make that choice?

msmithcape: 1) Sure, to the best of my ability, of course the first question I would have in the transparency exchange would be "who are you?" I log in as "Don"; pretty transparent from the get go. However, Aaron's disciples have also been known to use alternative identities to cause trouble. So who you are is relevant. As well, are you willing to ask Aaron lifestyle, family and work questions(if its truth you seek rather than embarrassment)? Transparency is not a weapon; its about truth. 2) In government, if you can't work with someone tomorrow after disagreeing with them today, you're not going to be a terribly effective representative. So, no, I am not going to restrict my blog in any way. 3) Mr. Buckley made comments to me on the Housing with Love Walk in the presence of another person. I wrote "You're Walking the Wrong Way" (see previous posts). He went back and predated a post to set up an excuse. Trouble was, it didn't happen the way he said it did. Accepting responsibility is how I raised my own kids and the Sunday School class I taught (as Superintendent) for 10 years.

Good point. We just celebtrated our 31st anniversary this past week; I was a Mary Ann guy (but demure isn't part of the equation - we're partners and best friends). And, no, I don't call her lovey.

That's why we're sticking to an hour and a half; three would be too risky. Also, we'll be cheking the manifest to assure there are no professors or women named Mary Ann. Can't be too careful.

Having raised three (and a half) kids and sent them off to college, I can prove the first part; all my assets are tied up in liabilities! And some people say I am as stubborn as a mule. But I also work for the things that I care about for many years (I guess its that pack mule thing).

Frugality, Monpo!

Without the Trust's active involvement, the so-called Shea property in East Harwich would have been turned into "Monomoy River Acres". I was a Selectman when the Town of Harwich voted its Town share to help buy the property; Chatham even kicked in to buy Harwich land in order to preserve it (it was that important)! But it still wasn't enough. Thew Trust helped put us over the top and has remained involved in the tutelage of the property. I urge readers to support the good work of these folks while there is still something left to conserve.

Great, as long as you mark the ballot along side the right name!

Were you there, Washashore? My hearing's fine. What was said was said; everyone can "spin" somewhere else. By the way, nice move, Andy, in writing your cover Blog two days after this posting, then backdating it to the day before. True, this site allows that right to each Blog administrator, but is it real? Think not.
Anyone out there read these Blogs daily like I do? Maybe I should back date this to the day before and predict what is to come.

I'm sorry, Ron and I must have both heard it the wrong way.

I believe his name was Willy. By the way, in my experience the smartest candidate is not the sure bet. I can promise you, though, that I'm not so vain that I won't admit to myself that I don't know something; I will, however, research anything I don't know. Thanks for the help Aunt Eunice (that would be Lovey to the rest of you)!

That would have been my dad, unless of course, you are talking about that 3 hour tour my wife and I took a number of years ago.

Actually, they do pay a personal property tax for their assets (which they, indeed, have recently been trying to get Congress to vote away; so much for local control). The other difference is that in order to get those perks, those companies were set up as regulated utilities (though they have certainly chipped away at that, too). No one is regulating Cape Wind's profit margin (there is a whole class of economists which do rate studies in respose to rate increase requests, but Reilly mitigated that, too, this past year in the N-Star debacle - see my site for more). Point is, these guys are in the DEREGULATED FOR-PROFIT sector of the power industry, not the utility portion. This whole discussion has been framed by the first company in the door requesting to use the Sound for private profit. Makes me long for the good old days of staking a claim to a homestead. Only now, you and I don't stake the claim - only companies need apply.

As usual in this debate, people (both pro and con) slide right by inconvenient questions. Cape Wind entered into this arena sole-source and without any rules in place. You are correct that all the people of the Commonwealth own the sand under the water. But you may want to go to a Town Meeting or two to check one out. No one gets to use public land for any kind of lease (check out my site about the cell tower lease) without a lease approved by Town Meeting. Maybe I missed the part where my interests were protected by competitively finding out how much is enough to charge for the use of the Sound. Unless, of course, my interests (and yours) are being protected by the endless string of Pols and bureaucrats involved in this thing. So the question still remains, why Cape Wind and no other? Why not put it out to bid and ratify (by vote) the resultant lease. That's the way it works here on land.

But one person's narrow mindedness is another's forward thinker. So, I don't know who's right in all of this, but I do know two durable truths. First, once things are built (land or water, good idea or not), they are rarely unbuilt to restore nature (the Everglades turned out brilliantly with the Corps' help, didn't they?). And second (and most important), once you give the Federal Government more expansive powers to facilitate your aganda, some day the "other side" (and take this more universally than merely in this instance) will take that expansive power to dictate its agenda. People come to this country - and others dream to do so - to pursue the freedom of choice. I don't wish to wake up each day to check in with Washington to find out what they have planned for me that day. Give up your local control grudgingly, it's the only thing real we have. Again, a vote sounds like a good idea.

Why? Are we too dunb to decide things at the local level? As a Selectman, I know I have been told by the State we couldn't even consider thoughts such as an increased mooring field, a harbor expansion or even certain types of dredging due to environmental considerations (read that State rules). So the Feds should rush in to save us (as they appear to be doing with the FCC takeover of cable regulation)? I know people get smarter once they move there, but I don't like giving up ever more local discretion.
So, absent any real evaluation structure at the onset, why is this puplic purpose a better one - even though it benefits private capital using public assets.
Finally, the project may well get approved, only to built by another company. You see, Cape Wind could sell it for a profit prior to build. Again, no free market argument washes here unless the rights were auctioned or sold competitively like they do with FCC bandwith or mineral rights.
I have consistently supported wind energy (in publicly recorded votes). In fact, Harwich will eventually have a tower at its High School.

Chuck,I am certain I will win no friends with this, but here goes. There are problems with argumants both pro and con. Since you are clearly pro, I'll deal with your issues only. This is public land; you own it but so do I and, for that matter, my neighbors and all residents of Mass. All the rules governing this were ad hoc - there was no bid on the use of public assetts. The presumption is that if we can clear all the hurdles the "antis" have erected, Cape Wind and only Cape Wind will build this. Why??? They didn't buy the land or even competitively lease it. Sweet deal! (and I don't want to hear that they came up with the idea first. Next you'll be telling me my neighbor should be allowed to beautify my house because I didn't think to do it and some public advantage outweighs my right to determine its condition) Hogwash! That's why Jimmy is right. A vote (even of those simplistic responders who just happen to own the waters) only seems right (even American). By the way, I don't know what happens to folks once they hit Washington, but more and more issues are being ceded to the Feds

OPPORTUNISM? I was a founder of the Youth Chaplain program. I was one of the two main organizers of the Walkathon (where I spoke at a dozen churches in the preceding month, bought and cooked the food, stayed up all night virtually alone with Bob Murray and DJ'd with my own equipment). I wrote the Lease for the Cell Tower/Flag Pole in East Harwich and was the contact point for the Sons of the American Revolution when they came to honor it. And FOAH had been in touch with me a month ago to auctioneer and MC their event (again with my own supplies, personnel and equipment) as a volunteer. They were all happy yesterday with the little extra publicity I was able to offer. Perhaps this may seem a little strange to you, but I actually am INVOLVED in these things. Some may criticize this. Other candidates are free to hold coffees and crash other people's events. My strategy is to be more visibly involved with things I have always been doing. By the way, my first charity auction was for Cystic Fibrosis 20 years ago. Here, I have done many, mostly for events I organized. How about VOLUNTEERISM?

Greg,
I was a journalism minor at Fordham University in another (pre-Cape)life. Loved your story almost as much as I have always loved our rapidly folding newspaper industry (my friends all wanted to be on T.V., but I fancied the print game, though it never happened). Politics aside, no town or city is better off with a single paper - where's the vibrancy or balance in that? So good luck to the Herald! Also, the Codder (and associated papers) never had the feel of news and ink when Fidelity ("Pennysaver") Investments ran the operation. I know papers have to generate (ad) money, but they still need to be seen and read by people to entice advertisers. Purcell's group has done a fine job here on the Cape of restoring the news part of the newspapers (Codder, Oracle, Register et al). I, for one, pray I will not have to miss that once again. After you've read the total allotment of two news stories, there are only so many ads you feel up to reading. I just hope they remain focused on the good things they achieved at Community Newspapers and wish Purcell the best.
Don Howell, CCT Blogger

Monponsett,
Give it a try. Then take the money you just saved and spend it on the auction that will also be held to support the Friends that afternoon at the Inn!

Monponsett,
Point taken. I Teach driver's Ed, so if you hit THIS flag, I'd have to question your condition. But I think it looks beautiful driving towards the intersection of 39 and 137 at night; I forgot to mention we had Sprint install night illumination too. Great cell reception too for users of Sprint, Cingular and T-Mobile.

Two years ago, I met with the DMH Commissioner when her organization had placed a Level 3 offender in a Housing Authority residence (he had been released from jail). This was a residence for people with mild psychological problems. Not only was this done without the Authority's knowledge, but it put the other residents in harm's way, as well as the immediate neighbors and the Harwich Junior Theatre, which was a couple of blocks away. Only a public outcry (led, in part, by Bill Doherty and me) got the guy moved. The repeat rate for these offenders is astounding. I often hear about their "rights," but what about the rights of the decent law abiding citizens? They remain in physical danger (no one can possibly track an offender every minute of the day) as well as the constant psychological trauma that is always present as they worry that a relapse could occur when their daughters or wives are alone. There is no perfect solution (barring a medical miracle), but we owe all our citizens their safety and privacy. Let's get this bill out into the open and get a roll call vote on it!

David,
It is because of kids like you that I fostered and adopted. Senator O'leary (who is on the Education Committee of the Senate and could help fix this) just stared blankly at me when I pointed out this injustice. A promise made should be a promise kept, especially to a defenseless kid. Worse, he was part of a movement to give free tuition to illegal aliens. I can't see even discussing that when we can't take care of our own kids!!!!! You deserve better than this! I promise you from the bottom of my heart that I WILL keep this alive until it is fixed.

Please stay in touch and keep the faith. There are people out there who care about you.
Don

Thanks Susan,
We, as a family have not given up. She is going to college, because WE borrowed the money. The state, however, remains a pretty shakey partner. And , by the way, the certificate needed to get the "free tuition" - the one that only covers 20% of the real cost and can only be issued by one man in one office (in Boston) - finally arrived this past week. It only took four phone calls to my State Rep to get it four months after I submitted it!

Wow, the blog seems to have reached a new demographic; 15 year olds! I remind our readers, as we welcome "XXXy" to the fold, that you still need to be 18 to vote in this state. Maybe in a few years...

Robert,
The other gentleman in the picture is David Marsland. He is a candidate for the seat I am vacating on the Board of Selectmen in Harwich. To reiterate the point of the night (and my campaign), I did not want my kick-ff to be partisan;I am actively seeking support from all citizens, regardles of party. As such, Dave is not part of the partisan group who normally attend this type of thing, but rather a guy who I have served with on the Planning Board, worked with when I was the liaison and he was the Chair of the Elementary School Building Committee, and observed as a member of my town's Public Safety Committee (to name just a few). Walter asked him to join us in the picture, but Dave is not running for a partisan office, nor would he be supporting me (or, I him) on a partisan basis. He's just a decent guy who came along with members of my church, members of the Harwich Senior Players, some members of the Chatham Drama Guild and others (not pictured) from my "other life" to show support for my bid to be your Representative (not merely your Republican Representative).

In the interest of accuracy, both Delahunt and Mr. Kennedy have Republican opponents. Civil Servant is right, both parties at various levels have been known to do this. I truly believe balance ia the key factor here(as opposed to rabid partisanship). When you continue to run with no real challenge (either party), you tend to believe you can not BE challenged. When I work with kids, I see this all brought into focus: it helps your sense of honesty when you know there is a consequence to being dishonest ("semi honest"???). Everyone talks about accountability, as long as they get to hold someone else accountable. We all need to expect more of our public officials and let them know that's how we feel.

Brian is, of course, right. But it's only a cop out if you just complain and never do anything about it. That's why we fostered/adopted. That's also one reason I am running for state office rather than for another term as selectman. No influence here locally.

As for the parent part, he's right again. The younger of the two daughters was molested by dad (not the good way, either). Both parents lost custody and were forbidden contact by court order. That didn't stop either of them from covertly "reaching out." Dad took to writing letters to them from jail, calling our home, and even stalked our neighborhood for a time. No action from DSS, though. In fact, when I write more about the "other sister", you will see that DSS essentially pimped her, by placing her in a single motel room which was shared with the birth mother (mistake #1), her boyfriend (mistake #2) and the girl's boyfriend (strike 3). "Surprisingly", the girl became pregnant. She was 17 and under DSS direct care. The state DID do that.

Somehow the fact that the state is us has gotten lost. I intend to change that.

Aaron and I have spoken about our shared experiece in various political settings for months. He has spoken openly about his life, as have I. It is part of what he and I are. My wife and I fostered and adopted long before any political ambitions entered the picture. We met the children in our church. I even asked for Shirley's help to reunite the sisters (which she gave us many years ago). He and I are bound together in this experience.

Pilgrim: I'm talking about the possibility of sharing a school superintendent between two towns or police dispatch between several Towns, not under the auspices of the County and certainly not limited to paper clips. Mutual Aid agreements are fine as far as they go, but we're talking about a multi-town staffed fire station in East Harwich right now, for instance. We have far too much overhead to be able to deliver services supported soley on property taxes. Look it up, there are dozens of discrete Police and Fire forces as well as school districts for an area covering 15 Towns and a little over 220,000 year round residents. Each Chief averages $100,000 give or take. Think bigger, Pilgrim