Hey, there! Log in / Register

At-large city councilor seeks bill to eliminate preliminary election

By adamg on Fri, 07/13/2007 - 10:13pm

Stephen Murphy will be asking the state Legislature to let Boston skip a preliminary at-large election this year and simply put all nine candidates on the November ballot, Wayne Braverman reports. The move would save the city the $500,000 it would cost to eliminate one of the nine candidates.

OK, so saving money is good and if all nine are on the ballot, no harm, no foul, right? Never mind it helps Councilor Murphy, because it means one less election for people to galvanize around a candidate to displace the perennial also-ran/barely-made-it councilor. In any case, Braverman ruins it all with his contempt for candidates who followed the rules and the people who might vote for them:

... This actually makes sense. To hold a primary and spend at least a half million dollars to get rid of just one candidate among a field of challengers of whom four of the five have almost no chance of beating or even come close to beating any of the four incumbents seems like a waste of money. ...

Sure, Wayne. But then, why bother holding elections at all if we already know the outcome? Works for North Korea, no?

Earlier:
Wait a minute - aren't elections a good thing?

Topics: 
Politics
Free tagging: 
City Council
2007 elections
Steve Murphy


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

By Anonymous on Tue, 07/24/2007 - 1:47pm.

BOSTON ELECTIONS BILL ENACTED IN HOUSE, NOW BEFORE SENATE: A city-approved bill that would eliminate the September preliminary election for the four at-large Boston City Council seats cleared the House but stalled in the Senate today. The controversial proposal, which would leave the current field of nine candidates undisturbed heading into the Nov. 6 election, which the Senate passed on Monday, was enacted in the House today but did not come before the Senate during its formal session. Sen. Anthony Petruccelli, the East Boston Democrat who along with Hyde Park Democrat Rep. Angelo Scaccia sponsored the bill, said the city “made a compelling case” that over $500,000 could be saved for city coffers by not holding the special election to eliminate just one candidate. Critics of the plan worry that the race’s dynamics – including strategy and spending – are being changed about two months before the scheduled Sept. 25 election. Matt O’Malley, director of legislative affairs for Suffolk County Sheriff Andrea Cabral and a candidate for an at-large seat in 2003 and 2005, said, “This sets an enormously dangerous precedent. It is one of the most self-serving pieces of legislation in my memory. Changing the rules after the fact is a dangerous, dangerous thing to do, and is one of the key reasons why people are so cynical about politics.” Asked about concerns the race’s outcome could be altered, Petruccelli said, “I don’t have any concerns about that at all.”

up
Voting closed 0