GOV. MAURA HEALEY this week launched herself into the battle over two of the ballot measures voters will decide this fall. With Healey riding favorable poll numbers into the half-way mark of her first term, it can’t be bad to have her on your side, but history suggests that even the most popular governors have limited ability to sway the outcome of contentious ballot campaigns.
Healey had already made clear her opposition to Question 2, which would remove passing MCAS as a high school graduation requirement, but she dialed things up considerably this week. “There has to be some uniform [graduation] requirement,” Healey said on Wednesday on GBH’s “Boston Public Radio” show, while adding that she is the daughter of two union teachers. (The Massachusetts Teachers Association, the state’s largest teachers union, is the driving force behind the ballot question, while business groups are behind the opposition that has struggled to keep up in the money race.)
Then she was off to a press conference that the question’s opponents hastily convened at a Roxbury youth services nonprofit, with Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll and Attorney General Andrea Campbell, where the three officials hammered home their opposition to the question. Healey’s political operation also blasted out an email to supporters, saying if Question 2 passes, the “only universal standard remaining for graduation would be completing four years of gym,” leading to “less rigorous standards than states like Alabama and Mississippi.” The email contained a link encouraging people to donate to the “no on 2” side.
Healey also said this week that she is opposed to Question 5, which would establish a minimum wage for tipped workers, siding with restaurant industry leaders who say it would upend their economics and lead to layoffs.
The governor said she’s still considering her vote on Question 3 (unionization for Uber and Lyft drivers) and Question 4 (legalization of psychedelics). On Question 1, which would explicitly authorize the state auditor, Diana DiZoglio, to audit the Legislature, Healey doesn’t plan to take a stand, telling GBH she’ll “leave that to the voters.”
To be sure, that question in particular is fraught with political peril for Healey. She needs the support of legislative leaders for a variety of her priorities, and they loathe DiZoglio and her ballot question. But if Healey publicly declares she’s voting no, she’s on the wrong side of a proposal that polls show enjoys broad bipartisan support among voters.
So what will it mean to have the governor speak out on the MCAS and tipped worker questions?
Charlie Baker, who enjoyed stratospheric favorable poll numbers during his two terms as governor, came out against marijuana legalization and for lifting the cap on charter schools in 2016. He hit the campaign trail hard for the latter, but voters didn’t appear to pay him much mind on either ballot question, giving a green light to marijuana and soundly defeating the charter ballot measure. (Healey in 2016 joined Baker, coming out against marijuana legalization when she was attorney general. When she issued a sweeping pardon for misdemeanor pot possession charges earlier this year, she acknowledged her stance evolved.)
If there’s a sliver of evidence Question 2 opponents can look to in hoping she can make a difference, it may be in a recent UMass/WCVB poll. It showed the “yes” side on the MCAS question is slightly ahead (53 percent), but a majority didn’t know that Healey, along with her education secretary, were against the measure.
It seems possible, therefore, that some voters’ position could be moved to “no” if the governor continues to speak out on the question in the closing weeks of the race. But that presumes they listen to her.
On MCAS question, a familiar Beacon Hill-DC divide
When it comes to the breakdown of where some of the state’s leading political figures land on the hotly debated ballot question over whether to scrap use of MCAS as a high school graduation requirement, it feels like deja vu all over again.
Last year, when the issue of public school teachers’ right to strike was front and center in the wake of walkouts by educators in several districts, the Massachusetts Teachers Association found strong allies in the state’s congressional delegation. Both of the state’s US senators, Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, as well as House members Lori Trahan and Ayanna Pressley, spoke out on behalf of striking teachers.
But the big three power brokers on Beacon Hill – Gov. Maura Healey, House Speaker Ron Mariano, and Senate President Karen Spilka – all came out against legislation that would make it legal for teachers to strike.
“The farther away you are from the consequences of endorsing a policy, it’s easier to make that endorsement,” Paul Reville, a former state education secretary, said at the time of the congressional delegation support for legalizing strikes.
A similar dynamic is at play in the MCAS ballot question. The Big Three on Beacon Hill have all come out against the effort to scrap the MCAS graduation requirement, a campaign being led by the MTA. Meanwhile, Warren has been joined by four House members of the state’s congressional delegation, Trahan, Pressley, Bill Keating, and Jim McGovern, in endorsing the ballot question.
As with the teacher strike issue, the big wigs with direct responsibility for state policy over schools are arguing against a major shift in state education policy, while some members of the state’s DC delegation are lining up with the state’s largest teachers union on the other side.
The Question 2 campaign has racked up endorsements from a slew of state legislators. As for other statewide officials, state Auditor Diana DiZoglio has come out in favor of the measure, while Attorney General Andrea Campbell is opposed.
The post Political Notebook: Does Healey have coattails on Question 2? appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.