The following was sent to the Berkshire area media today, announcing the participation of three Green-Rainbow candidates in the Josh Billings Triathlon.

This week a reporter from the Berkshire Eagle contacted me and other candidates for a story in progress.  One item requested was a short explanation of why I’m running for office.  The question is a good one to regularly ask oneself while in the public spotlight.  Below is what I submitted.  

The Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA) recently sent my campaign a candidate questionnaire.  There were nine questions on the subjects of raw milk, GMO labeling, and poultry processing.

The MA Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus recently sent my campaign a questionnaire, which I am returning today.  My support on the issues of civil rights, marriage rights, privacy, HIV/AIDS policy, and education is resolute, which their members will see easily enough in my answers.

The cover letter to the questionnaire identified the caucus as being ‘bi-partisan.’  This made me wonder if the caucus is open to endorsing a candidate from outside the parties that are generally defined by the term ‘bi-partisan,’ or if they limit serious consideration only to candidates from two parties.  I asked about this last week, but have not received an answer yet.

October 4, 2012 update:  I reiterate my standing policy on debates, which is that I will accept all public debate invitations that are made in good faith by an identified sponsor to all ballot-qualified candidates.  This pledge applies both when I am a challenger and when I am an incumbent seeking re-election.

My debate policy was also reiterated when the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance included a question about my willingness to debate on its 2012 candidate questionnaire, which I answered and made public.  Question #4 noted that many incumbents avoid or seek to limit the number of forums they participate in with opponents.  It asked if I would pledge to continue a practice of public debate after election.  The answer, of course, was YES.

The following was originally written in August of 2010.

48% REDUCTION IN LOCAL AID?  A CALL FOR NEW BUDGET PRIORITIES

“We don’t give you very much,” the Republican state senator candidly told the people of Tolland on July 10, standing with the Democratic incumbent representative of the 4th Berkshire District on the podium.  It was unclear if he was talking specifically about the FY 2011 budget that had been approved on June 24 or if he was speaking generally about business as usual in the legislature.  The town was celebrating its 200th birthday and the mood of the day was festive.  If the senator was looking for a laugh, the humor was lost on many.

Democrats are not in a position to counter the statement.  They’re in control.  The official Massachusetts Democratic Party line, which has been dutifully repeated by incumbents and loyalists, is that there’s nothing that can be done about the painful cuts in the budget.  But even as the incumbent legislature and Governor perpetuate an unfair tax system and cut essential services and local aid,  they also continue the wasteful give-aways and tax breaks for large campaign donors.  Currently in legislative conference committee are proposals to enact new corporate tax reductions of over $140 million/year, on top of the $1.4+ billion in many other give-aways that are routinely renewed.  Some of us are feeling the pain.  Others are getting a free ride.  It’s a deliberate choice.

Meanwhile, recent headlines in the Boston Globe (July 23, 2010) report a 25% increase in personal bankruptcy filings in Massachusetts.

 

Updated on July 20 with the following good news from Scott Laugenour, candidate for State Legislature from the Berkshire Fourth District–visit his web site for more information:

I am pleased to report that my campaign collected enough signatures for a single payer question – drafted by Mass Care – to be placed on the November ballot.  The signatures were sent to Mass Care on July 16. Here is the campaign statement [originally published on GMG on July 7]:

The 4th Berkshire District is on track to have a health care reform question on November’s ballot, specifically promoting a comprehensive public health insurance system similar to what most other democracies in the world have.

Scott’s campaign took the lead in giving voters in the 4th Berkshire District an opportunity to weigh in on the issue.

We in the Green-Rainbow Party are occasionally asked about the ‘Rainbow’ in our name.  A few days ago an inquiry came into the party’s e-mail address from a person who suggested dropping the ‘Rainbow’ because including it in the party name might turn off some people.  The party’s Treasurer, Merelice, offered reply (A) below.  I was copied on her reply and felt a great deal of pride for the party that I affiliate with and whose slate I campaign on as a candidate.

Last month, a different inquiry came to the party from a voter who was concerned that the party did not adequately promote gay/lesbian issues.  I wrote the reply (B) which follows (A) in the next section.

This is the prepared text of a speech that I gave at the Berkshire Regional Convention of the Green-Rainbow Party on June 19, 2010 in Pittsfield.  I am running for State Rep in the 4th Berkshire District.

Other speakers at the event were JD Hebert, who spoke on homelessness, Nick Stanton, who discussed Transition Towns, Mark Miller, candidate for State Rep in the 3rd Berkshire District, and Jill Stein, candidate for Governor.

National Popular Vote – A Voting Reform to Support

“Politics should be local, and with the passage of this reform presidential politics in Massachusetts will be local.”

The Massachusetts House plans a debate this week on a voting reform which I support, known as “National Popular Vote” (NPV).  The incumbent in the 4th Berkshire District co-sponsored this legislation in the last legislative session (H660 in January 2009), it eventually passed in the House but stalled in the Senate. I urge the incumbent to join me in support of it again during this session, and to join me in educating voters on why this reform is worth supporting.