Which Politicians Will Follow Tom Birmingham into Retirement?

Only 30 Days to Change

By MassNews Staff
December 2002 Print Edition

Tom Birmingham will soon be gone. We are genuinely sorry to see this happen. Birmingham was surprised that the people were so upset at him. It appears that he didn't want to break the law. He seems to be a decent man.

But he didn't realize that the Boston Globe is no longer in charge at the State House. The rules changed this year. Politicians are now free to do the right thing instead of getting their orders from Morrissey Boulevard.

The Globe is no longer a locally-owned company. Its bold statement at the bottom of the Editorial Page says it clearly: "A NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY NEWSPAPER."

		It has been the powerhouse in Massachusetts politics for many years. There's been no politician with the courage or ability to stand up to it with the recent exception of Speaker Finneran - and look at the tremendous hits he takes from them as a result. But this is all changing. Pundits are analyzing the 2002 election and realizing that the Globe is a paper tiger since MassNews started presenting the other side of so many issues. Tom Birmingham was not in charge. He did what he was told, but he also said, "I also think that we're sent here to vote on things." He appeared reluctant to obey the orders that were being conveyed to him. He never doubted that it was his attacks against the Amendment that hurt him so badly. He said, "I'm a big boy. I took a stand fully knowing what the reaction of the other side would be and would have to be completely removed from the process not to know. I got all the e-mails and everything else beforehand, so this reaction doesn't surprise me. It doesn't faze me either." His negative ratings rose sharply after his failure to have a vote on the Amendment. After he postponed the vote on June 19 and then adjourned the Constitutional Convention on July 17, he began to slip in the polls and his negative ratings rose. He never recovered.
The Boston Globe makes it very clear that it is, "a new york times company newspaper," i.e. a subsidiary of the powerful New York City conglomerate.

Bay Windows reported it this way, "Birmingham, who has consistently polled third behind O'Brien and Reich [after the Constitutional Convention], acknowledged that he has 'taken some hits' because of his stance against the ballot initiative - negative e-mails, hate mail, jeers along the campaign trail - but he's long since given up on pleasing everyone. 'This is one of those issues that if people choose to reject my candidacy over it, I'll sleep at night knowing I did what I thought was right in my heart. … I want to win this election - but this is what I thought was right, if people want to reject me because of that, I can live with that.'"

There's no doubt that Birmingham believes he - and the Democratic Party - lost because of the Marriage Amendment. And the facts show that he is correct.

Will other politicians realize the seismic change that has occurred in Massachusetts politics? The crack in the Globe since it became a subsidiary of a New York City conglomerate began to show in the 2000 election when Steve Lynch survived a pummeling from the Globe in his race for Congress because of his stand against abortion. He emerged victorious and more powerful.

However, most politicians are still looking to the Globe for their daily orders. If they don't follow those orders, they will take a lot of heat. But the Internet has made it possible for MassNews to get the truth to enough voters to make a difference.

The question is, what are people such as Rep. David Linsky, Sen. Harriette Chandler and Sen. Robert Antonioni going to do? Are they aware of this tremendous change?

Rep. David Linsky represents the district of Sarah McVay Pawlick, President of Mass. Citizens for Marriage.

"We like David," says Pawlick. "He's an intelligent, sincere young man. He told us during the summer that he was concerned about the illegal vote. He believes it will hurt the Democratic Party and the Legislature. He voted the way he did because he was 'part of a team.' We didn't realize who the 'team' was until the Globe endorsed this obscure 'back bencher' this fall. This made it apparent that David is planning to seek higher office. He has ambitions and believes the Globe can help him. He doesn't realize that he is following Tom Birmingham's route. The Globe doesn't have the clout they used to have, and they will drop him like a hot potato if another, 'better' candidate comes along.

"David feels safe now because he has another two years. We sent a letter throughout his district. But we didn't try to defeat him anymore than the vast majority of the 21 districts where there was no opposition. David also had no opposition because his opponent ran on a sticker campaign and even endorsed gay marriage. We will watch very closely to see if David votes again to break his oath of office and violate the Constitution. If he does, he will see real opposition in 2004.

"Some people will say that this is a 'threat' on our part. But if it is now a threat to say you demand a Legislator who will obey the law, then it is clear why we need a new State House."

Pawlick said that what happened in this election should be a notice to all politicians, but particularly those in districts like Linsky, Chandler and Antonioni. In the future, they blindly follow the Boston Globe at their peril.

She said that her organization had no intention of getting into partisan politics when they started the process for the Marriage Amendment two years ago. But they have been catapulted into it. They believe they will be able to get out of politics by having a vote on the Amendment in December, but if they don't, there will be tens of thousands of voters energized to make a seismic change in Massachusetts.

		"The politicians have a choice this month. Obey the law and follow the Constitution or energize tens of thousands of angry voters who will want to change everything at the State House" she says. The politicians all want to pretend it was just Sen. Birmingham and they had no choice. This includes the new Senate President, Robert Travaglini, who says there's nothing he can do until he takes office in January. But he, too, voted to break the law on July 17. Why doesn't he publicly apologize and urge Birmingham to take a vote before this destroys the Democratic Party? Many voters are wondering, can he do any less if he is sincere? Mitt Romney also obeyed the Globe which frightened him when it ran a story about him last March. The story had this headline across the top of a page, "Romney kin signed petition to ban same-sex marriage."
Many say it's sad that Tom Birmingham may end his public career with a humiliating loss in his race for Governor because he still believed that the Boston Globe rules the state and the State House.

The headline was not accurate as the Globe continued to hammer its lie about the Amendment - which is not directed at gays. The Globe knows that. The Amendment seeks to keep the institution of marriage as it has always been in the state. The gays represent a very small number of people who would be affected by the Amendment. The vast majority of those affected would be straight people.

The lead paragraph in the Globe story reported that Romney's wife and son had signed the petition for the Amendment. It said Romney "himself condemned [the Amendment] as too extreme after being told of his family's support for it."

In its third paragraph, the paper reported that gay rights groups "fiercely oppose" the measure and the next paragraph had this quote from a homosexual lawyer, "It's scary that his family would work to actually change the Constitution." But the Amendment does not "change" the Constitution. It merely reaffirms what everyone has always agreed was the definition of marriage when the Constitution was originally written. No definition was ever included because no one thought it necessary. The present Amendment would codify the definition that everyone has always agreed upon.

No one disagrees that a large majority of the voters favor the Amendment. That's what has the extreme feminists at the Globe so concerned.

The Globe then used its advocacy of sexual freedom for all, including schoolchildren, in the following attempt to hammer Romney:

"Romney was haunted by his positions on homosexuality in his 1994 US Senate race against Edward M. Kennedy," wrote the Globe. "He was reported to have told a group of Mormons that homosexual relations are 'perverse,' and his antigay marriage stance was particularly controversial because of his stated belief that any sex outside of marriage is wrong."