Hey, there! Log in / Register
Candidate for court clerk job appears at rally on one side of MBTA zoning issue now before the court
By adamg on Thu, 06/20/2024 - 11:15am
CommonWealth Beacon reports that Boston City Councilor Erin Murphy, who now cares about Winthrop, too, appeared at a rally against a state mandate there that would require the town to rezone some land to allow for higher density development because it's served by the T.
Murphy is running for Suffolk County clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court - which is currently considering an appeal of the mandate from Milton. As clerk, she would have no direct say in the court's ruling, but at least one former federal judge interviewed by CommonWealth said that's kind of bad form.
Murphy herself told CommonWealth just because she posed for photos at the Winthrop rally doesn't mean she's taking a side on the issue. She says she supports the measure in Revere, which makes up the district along with Winthrop, Boston and Chelsea - and she just happened to be walking by the rally when she decided to show some support for people who object to government mandates being "shoved upon them."
Murphy is running against Allison Cartwright, a public defender and lawyer for 23 years - although having knowledge of courts is not a requirement for the job.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Towns are like Teenagers
GET OUT OF MY LIFE but give me my allowance NOW!
she just lost my vote
The problem isn't the position she's taking on the MBTA zoning law--it's that after being photographed at a political rally, she said she doesn't agree with the protesters, she was just walking past.
The problem isn't that she impulsively joined a rally, it's that she claims that joining a protest doesn't mean she agrees with it.
You Weren't Voting For Her Anyway
You are like those Republican politicians who are "outraged" to discover Bert and Ernie are living together and they are going to cut off funding for PBS even though they grew up watching Sesame Street.
Elected officals should listen to everyone
A good elected official will approach people with opposing views and discuss the issue, not just limit their contact to supporters.
Often people with opposing views do have legitimate concerns which aren't what the other side assumes. Trying to find ways of addressing those concerns or at least listening to them instead makes for better government.
It's not good for democracy when politicians take the view that everyone who isn't their supporter must be their enemy and should be avoided.
Listening is different than
Listening is different than going to a rally and holding a sign with political position (against the zoning). That’s not listening, it’s advocating, which is fine, but you can’t say you just happened on the rally and a sign flew in your hands that you don’t agree with.
Yes, good elected officials
Yes, good elected officials (and candidates for office) listen to their constituents, and answer questions.
That's different from taking a specific position on an issue. It's also different from trying to take two opposing positions on an issue at the same time.
Sometimes when I write to one of my representatives about something, the answer is a generic "thanks for contacting me" or "I still support the opposite of your position about this subject," and that's normal and appropriate. I don't expect any of my reps to agree with me on everything.
I agree @Vicki. Both-siderism
I agree @Vicki. Both-siderism is no way to run a government. Politicians need to choose their lane and stick with it or at least if they do change their view explain what led them to the flip. Not just seem to agree with everybody on all issues. It's a bad look and a bad way to govern.
Agree with everyone? No.
But they should listen to almost everyone and be willing to make changes when people bring up valid points.
Otherwise you continue the current trend of taking a position for the sole reason that it's the opposite view of your opponent.
The problem seems to be she's
The problem seems to be she's lying.
NIMBY-At-Large
Chasing every NIMBY bandwagon in Suffolk County for a look-at-me selfie-fest is definitely not the kind of energy I want to see polluting the Supreme Judicial Court.
Even if she had any qualifying experience for the job (which I don't believe she does), I doubt she could stay in her lane and resist interfering with court business in order to earn points with her fellow regressives.
Duh
look at a map. Winthrop is part of Suffolk County.
Duh,indeed
It's been a part of Suffolk County for centuries. But until recently, Murphy never expressed much interest in it one way or another and now she's taking a side on a very, very local Winthrop issue that just happens to be before the court she wants to work for.
Sorry, she's not taking a position, she's just standing with people who are taking a position. Completely different thing, never mind.
What’s Cartwright’s position?
I guess who knew zoning was in the portfolio of a court clerk, but here we are?
Now the people of Winthrop know Murphy. Meanwhile, Cartwright is still a bit of a mystery.
Whoosh
I believe you've missed the point.
Alas
So have you.
Name recognition is 90% of elections. Murphy got her name out in Winthrop. Her opponent is still unknown outside of this website, and a lot of that is the editor’s distain for centrist politicians.
Murphy's Law
A little bug got in my ear and I cannot get this phrase out of my head.
To be clear, this has no immediate political opinion behind it but I'll bet there could be...
Oh, by the way
Whether it was appropriate for her to do this is an interesting question, but i can't get past my continued amazement that Clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court is an elective position. The Spoils System in all its rotten glory.
Please explain...
...just what this "Spoils System" is, and how an elective position is a "spoil".
Winthrop will be joining the MBTA district
As part of the Better Bus Project, the current bus routes operated by Paul Revere (712 and 713) will be replaced by MBTA Routes 119 and 120, hence Winthrop would be subject to the MBTA housing affordability guidelines. It won't be until 2026 or so, but that's probably why the politicians are getting into this now.
I realize it’s the purview of
I realize it’s the purview of the Socialist-Progressives to wrest the regressive democratic local control from towns, but this anti-democratic, dark of night passage of the MBTA communities Diktat comes with a steep, steep slope of slipperiness.
NIMBYISM is a useful and
NIMBYISM is a useful and profitable insult, but that’s not what this is entirely about. It’s about antidemocratic elements co-opting the Democratic Party.