With just under a week to go until election day, it's time to hand out some endorsements. As in the past, we're only dealing with what's on the ballot here in MA (and in my district specifically). Let's start with...

Ballot Questions

Question 1: The first question is about the "right to repair," and would require automakers to share proprietary information with independent repair shops, thus allowing them to fix things that currently require a trip to a dealership. The question's a moot point now, as the legislature passed a bill at the end of the last session that was basically a negotiated settlement between both sides. There's a fear that approving this question will screw up the new law, but as the legislature sees free to not act on ballot questions (we're still owed that lower tax rate we voted for back in the day), I'm not so concerned. But I do figure that it doesn't make sense to vote in favor of a question whose issue has apparently been addressed. Blogalicious endorses a NO vote on Question 1.


Question 2: This question seeks approval for legalized physician assisted suicide. I'm not a fan of some of the particulars of how this would be carried out - heirs can witness both the decision and death, the doctor does not need to be present when the death occurs, and the determination of terminal illness/six months to live is inherently problematic - so I'm going to pass.  Blogalicious endorses a NO vote on Question 2.

Question 3: This question would legalize medical marijuana. Outside of all the usual wailing and gnashing of teeth about drugs being bad, the thing that gives me pause about this question is the involvement of the state Department of Public Health. Given the recent DPH chemist scandal, I'm not sure I trust them right now to administer a statewide program of pot dispensation and individual cultivation. We decriminalized possession in 2010, and while it still makes getting pot difficult, I don't know if this law is the best next step. I'd rather have the Department of Revenue be in charge, if only to smooth things over for the legalize-and-tax system that'd be on the ballot in, say, 2018.
Blogalicious endorses a NO vote on Question 3.


Public Offices

State Representative: the incumbent is running unopposed, so Blogalicious endorses writing someone in. Preferably me.

State Senator: Fred Berry retired, leaving Democrat Joan Lovely to square off against Republican Richard Jolitz. Both seem to hold positions typical of their party - Jolitz seems more conservative than the average Massachusetts Republican - but there's been sufficiently little coverage of the race to really get a lot of background. Jolitz doesn't seem to have a campaign website, opting to use social media as his main conduit for communications. The top hit for the Google search "jolitz state senate" is an article from when he ran in 2010. Based on the ability to at least learn what each candidate stands for, Blogalicious endorses Joan Lovely.

Governor's Council: I'm not even going to bother, because (a) no one knows who's running without looking it up, and (b) the Governor's Council is archaic and should be disbanded. Blogalicious endorses writing someone in here, too. Preferably Mickey Mouse.


US House MA-6: The only "issue" in this race is whether or not the incumbent, Democrat John Tierney, knew that his wife was involved in a gambling ring involving her brothers. He claims he didn't, and is quick to quote a judge in the case who says so. The challenger, Republican Richard Tisei, is equally quick to say that's nonsense. He doesn't have any proof of this, other than statements by his (now incarcerated) brothers in law.  But there's enough traction there to make this a close race. Just not an interesting one, if you're concerned about what approach either candidate will take towards the economy, or education, or pretty much any substantive issue.

(Tierney, for his part, has worked hard to link Tisei with the Tea Party folks, which isn't the most natural fit given that Tisei is pro-choice and openly gay.)

The only candidate actually talking about issues is a first-time candidate for a third party, so he's gotten almost no coverage. Which is a shame, as he's regularly shown himself to be a thoughtful candidate unafraid to address serious issues and, in the big picture, the very role of government. For going where the muckrakers fear to tread, Blogalicious endorses Libertarian Daniel Fishman. Tell your friends.

US Senate: Hope sprang eternal in this race between incumbent Republican Scott Brown and Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren. They agreed that if any third party ran an ad for them in this campaign, the candidate would have to make a donation equal to the amount of the ad buy to a charity of the opponent's choice (it happened once, and the donation was made). With that, it seemed like we could actually have a civil, issues-driven campaign.

Whoops.

What we've gotten is occasionally more dignified than the average mud-slinging. Brown has spent most of his campaign burnishing his bipartisan regular guy persona, getting plenty of barn coat time and making ads and debate references to various blue collar industries (fishing, for example) and "union guys." He's studiously avoided mentioning he's a Republican, and in at least one debate engaged in some pretty significant verbal gymnastics to avoid backing Mitt Romney and confirming that he would vote for Mitch McConnell as his party's leader in the Senate.

His other focus in the campaign has been to say that Elizabeth Warren isn't who she says she is (referring to her staking out a claim as the protector of the middle-class). This has mostly covered talk-radio friendly subjects, like her claim of Native American ancestry and her work for insurance companies in cases involving asbestos and steel workers. Hard to say how much of this has worked - you don't hear much of anything about these issues in these last days of the campaign.

Warren, for her part, has stuck to her main campaign theme - the political and financial systems are working together to stack the deck against average Americans - though at times she's stuck too closely to it (most notably in the debates, where references to "millionaires and billionaires" made a good drinking game counterpoint to Brown's effusive use of the title "Professor" when referring to Warren). She's mostly attacked Brown on his votes on women's issues and the potential for his re-election leading to a Republican-controlled Senate.

Over all of this, though, the thing that's surprised me the most about this race has been Brown's tendency towards dickishness.It was evident in the debates, and was especially evident in his (since recanted) suggestion that some of the people appearing in Warren's ads were paid actors. Combine this with his vague grasp of issues, and it's not much of a choice. Blogalicious endorses Elizabeth Warren.

President: Speaking of Republicans trying to grab the bipartisan mantle, we have Mitt Romney, who is looking to complete his Etch-a-Sketch/pivot campaign by tacking back to the middle after running to the right in the primaries. Which is all well and good as an electoral strategy, but leaves me with one lingering problem. I do not believe that Romney has any core principles outside of getting elected.  As Gertrude Stein would say, there is no there there, though that doesn't seem to bother a significant portion of the electorate.

Which you think would lead me to endorse President Obama, But it doesn't. I tend to think that his focus on health care prevented a more substantive approach to improving the economy, and his willingness to bail out financial institutions while not holding anyone accountable for putting the economy into the tank in the first place doesn't smack of hope or change. It smacks of business as usual. There are any number of things that have happened during his administration that I can get behind (repeal of DADT and dispatching bin Laden, most notably), but I can't get worked up for four more years of this.

Which leads me to do pretty much the same thing I did in 2004 and 2008. If you're someone who tends to vote Republican, you have as an option another former governor, one who made his vetoes stick and who got balanced budgets passed. And for all of you who drift towards the fiscally conservative, socially liberal stance, he's (sort of) pro-choice, supports same-sex marriage, and wants to end the drug war. For those of you who tend to vote Democratic, there's a candidate who is consistently left of center on pretty much everything and supports a New Deal-style program for creating jobs though investing in clean energy and putting greater oversight on the financial services sector. Depending on how you swing, Blogalicious endorses either Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson or Green candidate Jill Stein.