Another election, another round of Blogalicious endorsements!

Ballot Questions

Question 1: This question seeks to repeal the gas tax law passed last year where the tax will automatically increase with inflation. Backers of the question tend to frame this as taxation without representation, which I'm kind of meh on (seems to me to be more about transparency, but we may just be dealing with semantics). Opponents say not indexing the tax will cause shortfalls when it comes to funding infrastructure projects (but do not say the real benefit to indexing is that they don't have to vote for tax increases which can be used against them in future elections).

We think anything that changes the amount of tax people pay should be approved openly, be it in the legislature or by ballot initiative. So we're actually endorsing a Yes on Question 1.

Question 2: We were in junior high when voters approved the bottle bill, putting a 5 cent deposit on bottles and cans for soda and beer. This question seeks to expand the deposit on to other beverages, most notably water and most non-carbonated non-alcoholic beverages. The beverage industry and their cronies have spent the most money on ads asking us to vote against the question.

And the ads have been as effective as they've been inaccurate. Backlash has led to some differently worded ads, including what might be the first #whitepeopleproblems ad, where a suburbanite bemoans having to sort bottles and find recycling machines (hint: they're at the entrance to your supermarket).

There is one thing that our 30 years of experience with the bottle has shown, and it's that containers with a deposit are recycled at a much higher rate than those that don't have a deposit. So go take a second and find your recycling machines, as we're endorsing Yes on Question 2.

Question 3: We're just on the cusp of actually having casinos in Massachusetts, so the timing is perfect for a question that would stop casino gaming in the state. This is one of those crazy questions where "yes" means "no" and vice versa.

Proponents of the question say the legislature's decision to allow gaming doesn't reflect the will of the people,  gaming is bad, the license-granting process is flawed/corrupt, casinos won't help the economy, etc. Opponents mostly tout job benefits and the idea that the money spent by Bay Staters in Connecticut and Rhode Island casinos should stay home.

We don't particularly care about casinos, but generally feel like there's been enough discussion to continue with approving and building them. So we endorse No on Question 3.

Question 4: there's actually been very little talk about what, to us, seems like an important question. If passed, Question 4 would require most employers to give sick time to employees (based on hours worked). Most opposition comes from food service, where employers can pay sub-minimum wage but would have to pay sick time at minimum wage. Connecticut has a similar (but more lenient) law, and costs have not risen greatly for most employers. And while we don't necessarily want to pay more for meals, we do like the idea that our server didn't have to choose between working sick and not getting paid. Vote Yes on Question 4.

Offices

Governor: We have five candidates for governor, though the focus is on Charlie Baker, the Republican taking his second shot at the office, and Martha Coakley, who won the Democratic primary due to what can only be assumed was widespread amnesia regarding her Senate campaign.

Baker is a slightly more affable candidate this time around, but his message is still one of tax cuts, pro-business policies and reforming welfare. That's still more of a plan than what Coakley's presented, as her ads have been very vague outside of a call to provide more mental health services (which is a personal issue for her based on her brother's suicide).

Any way you look at it the major parties are offering us leftovers, and it looks like those of us at the buffet are tending towards Baker (even the Globe endorsed him).

But we cast our eyes towards the three independent candidates, and find one that's more appealing than Baker or Coakley. Evan Falchuk is running as a member of the United Independent Party, which he is hoping to get past the threshold where the party gets better ballot access, etc. And it's not a bad time to try this, as neither of the major party candidates are inspiring and the majority of Massachusetts voters continue to be unenrolled in a party. We also like the deeper thinking Falchuk has presented on improving quality of life in Massachusetts by addressing how the high costs of housing and health care make living here difficult for many. So we're endorsing Evan Falchuk for Governor, to at least give us more choice among candidates.

Treasurer: The main candidates have basically run one ad each. Democrat Deb Goldberg ties her being an adoptive mother to understanding how important it is to give people opportunities to succeed. Republican Mike Heffernan's mentions his private business experience and showcases his wacky family. Given those choices, we endorse Green-Rainbow Party's Ian Jackson for Treasurer.

Attorney General: Maura Healey for Attorney General based on her experience in the AG's office.

Secretary of State: While we've given him the occasional mocking for being a lifer, we'll endorse William Galvin for Secretary of State.

Auditor: As last time, we're going to endorse the candidate with actual auditing experience gained outside of being state auditor. So the GOP's Patricia St. Aubin for Auditor

US Representative: We don't have anything against Richard Tisei, but don't like the idea of giving this particular set of House Republicans another member to obstruct with. Or, perhaps worse, a member who'll be marginalized as a RINO. We also have to admit to having a liking for someone whose big reveal about his military past is that he doesn't talk about the medals he was awarded. So it's Seth Moulton for MA-6.

All the other races: we really don't care who you vote for in any of the other races, so we'll endorse voting for all the third party candidates who may be listed, or the non-incumbent if it's a two party race.

For any unopposed race (like 2nd Essex State Senate), we endorse writing in Mark Coen.
 Though that might prove tricky if he doesn't live in your district.