Why Checks and Balances Are Enough
Republican Mitt Romney won Gloucester when we elected a governor five years ago. He beat the Democratic contender by about 500 votes across our city — the same election that gave Democratic Congressman John Tierney 5,000 more Gloucester votes than his Republican competitor.
How could this be, when the values and goals of Romney and Tierney could not be more different?
There are a number of reasons, including two that we hear often: some voters “vote for the man, not the party” or believe that Massachusetts needs a “balance” between the parties.
In previous columns I’ve discussed why ignoring party affiliation is a mistake (one I myself made in the past).
Today let’s look into this idea of “balance.”
When our founding fathers devised our Constitution, they developed a system of “checks and balances” by creating three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial.
Each branch has defined powers, and each branch has powers over the others.
Even when our executive and legislative branches were both in Democratic hands — 15 years ago — the governor was checked-and-balanced by the House of Representatives and the Senate and the courts, and vice versa.
The governor is elected by all the voters, making that office accountable to our entire Commonwealth.
State senators are accountable to their regions. Regional interests and priorities vary. A senator from western Massachusetts, for example, will have a different outlook on some issues from a senator representing Boston, even if they are in the same party.
State representatives are accountable to an even smaller region — ours is elected by Gloucester, Essex, and Rockport. A representative of the wealthy towns of Natick, Wellesley, and Weston will likely view some initiatives differently from our representative, even if both are Democrats.
Checks and balances are built into our system of government.
If you look back at times when our federal government made the most progress, under the leadership of a Democratic president and Democratic Congress, you’ll see many compromises between the branches.
Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt had a difficult time achieving the results we should all be grateful for, because he had to line up votes from Democratic senators and congressmen from very different regions. He had to compromise with members of his party on preparations for World War II, Social Security, civil rights, and the minimum wage, though of course his fiercest battles were with Republicans.
If you vote for Democrats for other offices but prefer a Republican for governor, the real effect is “checkmate.” We already have the checks and balances, thanks to our founding fathers.
Checkmate is what has afflicted Massachusetts for 15 years, during the Republican administrations of governors Weld, Cellucci, Swift, and Romney.
Our Legislature has protected us from some of the cruelest initiatives of an executive branch controlled by the Republican Party.
But the Legislature can’t protect us in areas where the executive branch has control. It’s the governor who appoints the heads of the state agencies, and those agency heads hire the managers that get the people’s work done (or undone).
For 15 years, under Republican governors, we’ve seen degradation in our state’s quality of life, some of it life-threatening.
We now have an inadequate public health department (we’ll be more conscious of this agency if a flu epidemic arrives in Massachusetts), an increase in people without health insurance, fewer doctors coming to live here, more hospitals closing.
We’ve experienced worsening roads, deteriorating bridges, and a shortage of public transportation options. It’s true that we finally got the Big Dig, but even that project wasn’t competently managed.
Many families can’t afford to rent or buy here, no matter how hard they work. State government hasn’t done what it could to make the housing crunch a little less severe.
Teachers and librarians have been cut. Tuition and fees at community colleges and UMass have become unaffordable. Most kids are faced with two options: pile on debt or skip college.
We’ve seen cuts in public safety — which affect all of us.
If you prefer a government that works for the common good, don’t allow our executive branch to be controlled by the Republican philosophy of government (“We’re all in this alone!”). Cast your vote for a Democratic governor when you go to the polls next year, so that our government can start to serve the people again.
Separately elected legislators, from different regions, as well as judges appointed by previous governors of both parties, will provide more than enough “balance.”
