(While there was no doubt but that any performance in a live debate would win Dr. Stein the recognition she deserves as a viable candidate, the fact of having achieved ballot status in itself should be be deemed sufficient for “having earned” a place at the debate table. – promoted by eli_beckerman)
INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE Tim Cahill began his closing statement in Monday’s first gubernatorial debate with a plea to be included – along with Green-Rainbow party candidate Jill Stein – in subsequent debates. Then he and Stein went on to show, with their contributions to the debate on Cape Wind, that they bring thoughtful, distinct perspectives the voters deserve to hear.
The single-issue focus of the debate provided a lens through which to view each candidate’s larger philosophy. Cahill’s statements were not the most coherent of the evening, but he did offer a defensible position against government “picking winners and losers” among businesses with large public subsidies, such as those provided to Cape Wind.
Stein, who supports renewable energy solutions in principle, raised important questions about the permitting process for the 130-turbine project in Nantucket Sound, and correctly noted the “record cynicism and distrust” among voters that could be stoked by a lack of transparency.
Republican candidate Charlie Baker went farther, denouncing Cape Wind as “a sweetheart deal” that could become a “monstrous big bet” gone wrong. But his main point was that the project’s relatively high cost of electricity would harm the state’s competitiveness, and he repeatedly tried to steer the discussion to the economy.
Governor Patrick found himself in the odd position of defending a major green power initiative against criticism from the Green party candidate, while pushing for a swifter permitting process than his more conservative opponents, who normally chafe at regulatory impediments to business. “Only in Massachusetts can we say that a project that has taken 10 years to get from concept to final approval is hasty,” he said. That remark prompted an admiring “touché” from Baker.
Suffolk University, and especially the non-partisan think tank MassINC, deserve credit for producing a well-mannered and substantive debate that hopefully sets the tone for the rest of the campaign. Cahill and Stein both contributed to that substance, and have earned a place on future stages.