Cradle of democracy?

By Jeff Jacoby
March 18, 2009

IF ANY STATE could be called a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party, it would be Massachusetts. Its statewide elected officials are all Democrats, as is every member of its congressional delegation. The Legislature is the most lopsidedly Democratic in the union - there are only five Republicans among the 40 senators, and just 19 in the 160-member House of Representatives - and it has been more than half a century since the GOP controlled either branch. Political analyst Jon Keller writes in "The Bluest State," his uninhibited survey of contemporary Bay State politics, "Massachusetts over the past few decades has been a Democrats' Burger King: They always have it their way."

Massachusetts isn't only the nation's most Democratic state. It is also the nation's most undemocratic state. Elections occur on a regular basis, but few of them are contested. Republican and Democratic candidates squared off over just 35 of the 200 legislative seats on the ballot last November - a pathetic 17 percent. In no other state are competitive races so rare. And rarer still are contested primaries: Last year, nearly 9 out of 10 Democratic incumbents were renominated without a challenge.

What explains the Bay State's dysfunctional democracy?

The Massachusetts Institute for a New Commonwealth, a nonpartisan Boston think tank, has been trying to answer that question. In the current issue of its journal CommonWealth, Alison Lobron contrasts the sclerotic political culture of Massachusetts with the electoral vibrancy of Minnesota. The dissimilarity between the two could hardly be more pronounced. Last fall, while the overwhelming majority of Massachusetts legislators ran unopposed for reelection, the Republican and Democratic parties contested every seat in the Minnesota House of Representatives.

What accounts for the difference? Part of the answer, Lobron suggests, has to do with money. Legislative candidates in Minnesota abide by a $35,000 spending cap, and taxpayers who contribute to public financing designate which party they want their dollars to support. In Massachusetts, incumbents deter challengers by amassing vast campaign war chests. Minnesota politicians, on the other hand, have a "carry-forward" rule that bars them from retaining more than $15,000 from one campaign to the next.

Full column

Related story;

CEOs put Mass. near bottom for business climate
By Jay Fitzgerald

Massachusetts rates a lowly 47th on a CEO survey of the best states to do business.

The Bay State can take some comfort that it overtook New Jersey on the annual list and that New York and California ranked dead last on the 2009 list released by Chief Executive magazine.

But the survey showed, as it has in prior years, that Massachusetts doesn’t have the best reputation among the nation’s top business leaders.

The biggest complaint, according to survey results, was that the state is too expensive.

Full story