Last month, in one of my now-completed courses, I was one of three of about 65 people to raise their hands when asked who voted in Cambridge's municipal elections. For some reason, I doubt that number will be much higher for the Dec. 8 Senate primary to replace Ted Kennedy. As a friend recently noted, the problem with the Democratic candidates in this fall's compressed campaign is it's hard to imagine any of the four as excellent senators. I was first planning to vote for Steve Pagliuca, the former Bain Capital executive, co-owner of the Celtics and exceedingly wealthy Weston resident who briefly considered buying the Globe, but now appears in its pages every day because of the campaign.
The allure of the businessman-turned-politician is never-ending. "If only government could be run as a business," we think, always forgetting that government, inherently, isn't a business. In fact, one of government's chief duties is to help those cast aside by business, but I'm susceptible to the siren's call too. "If someone was talented enough to become a wealthy, successful businessman, couldn't he apply the same skills to creating an effective, compassionate government?" Bloomberg largely helps show the answer can be yes. These days, when our country sits in a two-year-old recession largely because of financial "products" that weren't as ingenious as promised, I like the idea of electing a financial executive who understands these concepts exceedingly better than the typical politician and can devise a way to regulate them such that recent history doesn't repeat itself.
However, when much of your campaign's economic rhetoric takes on a populist edge, as Pagliuca's has, you've created your own large problem. Pagliuca can criticize Wall Street, but, as as a former private-equity executive, he's also Wall Street. That private equity is more about restructuring companies, often involving laying off lots of workers, adding lots of debt and reselling the companies for lots of profit for the private equity managers, compared to venture capital, which is more about growing companies, doesn't help. Of course, those inside an industry know its foibles the best, but he doesn't make a compelling case for building on his background to create a growing economy that benefits as many as possible. (David Bernstein, the Boston Phoenix's political writer, has noted the same.) And, of course all political advertisements are overblown, overly simple and misleading. But to have your tag line be"Pags = Jobs" is generally absurd and smacks a little too much of Tammany Hall -- i.e. "A vote for Pagliuca means we'll find a job for you in a patronage machine."
Searching for politicians who are true to themselves is an often fruitless endeavor, but Pagliuca's campaign, only a couple of months after he wasn't able to buy the Globe, seems like a wealthy guy rooting around his pockets for his next act rather than doing something out of conviction. I'll probably opt for someone with more genuine conviction, though I'm not settled yet on who that exactly is.
Update: I voted for Congressman Michael Capuano, who lost by a very wide margin. Turnout was quite low throughout the state. The polling place in my school had no more than 100 people the whole day, which is disappointing. I love to vote. Voting, wearing my "I voted" sticker, and buying a $1.00 gingerbread cookie at 8 a.m. to support a local school's field trips fund makes me proud.
No comments:
Post a Comment