Toomey promotes environmental endorsements in reelection campaign
The Massachusetts Sierra Club and Massachusetts League of Environmental Voters have endorsed state Rep. Tim Toomey in his reelection campaign for the 26th Middlesex District, which serves parts of Cambridge and Somerville.
The endorsements were announced by Toomey on Friday in the run-up to a Tuesday debate with his challengers in the Nov. 6 election, independent Mike “No Money” Connolly, also of Cambridge, and Republican Thomas Michael Vasconcelos, of Somerville.
The upcoming 90-minute debate starts at 7 p.m. at Cambridge Community Television, 438 Massachusetts Ave., Central Square.
“Environmental issues have always been of central importance to me,” Toomey said, “and I believe my record shows just that.”
Toomey has advocated for open space in congested East Cambridge, supported the successful effort to block Boston University from limiting public access to the Charles River, helped create and expand parkland in North Point, and been a consistent advocate for improving and expanding public transportation, a campaign press release said.
“Public transportation is an essential part of reducing our carbon footprint,” Toomey said. “I am proud of the work we’ve done to expand MBTA service in Somerville. The Assembly Square Station, which is being built as we speak, is the T’s first new subway station in 25 years, and the construction of the Green Line Extension is nearly under way.”
He called the neighborhoods touched by the Green Line Extension project the most densely populated part of the country without access to a subway line, as well as prone to greater incidences of health problems linked to air pollution such as heart disease and childhood asthma, and said that with the project done, “cars traveling through our communities will drive 25,000 fewer miles per day.”
Many of these issues were touched upon in the candidates’ first debate, held Oct. 17 at Somerville Community Access Television in Union Square, with Connolly being the one to note the illnesses resulting from traffic in Somerville and wondering if “Inner Belt” redevelopment could include a giant park instead of becoming mainly buildings. Vasconcelos said pollution was an unfortunate accompaniment to living in a city. Toomey’s position was that the “build-build-build” attitude from decades past resulting in the massive Interstate 93 was unfortunate, and that more money should be put into mass transit.
In his press release, Toomey also pointed out the state Sierra Club’s previous endorsement of his efforts to prevent the Grand Junction Railroad from being used for Commuter Rail service, noting that “the Sierra Club’s support of our efforts was critical.”
Other efforts highlighted in the Toomey press release:
He has been a long-time advocate for reforming and updating the Bottle Bill to cover fruit juices, teas and sports drinks that are sold in recyclable bottles, but currently do not have a deposit. He is a co-sponsor of the Safer Alternatives Bill, a piece of legislation that would promote the use of less-toxic and nontoxic chemicals. This measure would not only protect our drinking water and watersheds from contamination, but also protect workers from the harmful effects of toxic chemicals by limiting their exposure to them. Toomey also co-sponsored a bill that would require manufacturers of mercury-added lamps to institute a recycling program for those lamps, and another bill that would require retailers to use compostable plastic bags at checkout. To encourage his constituents to use reusable cloth shopping bags instead of disposable plastic bags, Toomey has even stood outside of supermarkets giving out tote bags to shoppers.
Toomey also spearheaded an initiative with the Cambridge Energy Alliance to reduce the carbon footprint of Cambridge’s municipal buildings and to harness sustainable sources of energy. Furthermore, he co-sponsored a bill that would promote energy efficiency in affordable housing through a $5 million grant program.
Toomey has been a Cambridge city councillor for roughly two decades — about the same amount of time he has represented the 26th Middlesex District.
“I treat the endorsements of the Massachusetts Sierra Club and the Massachusetts League of Environmental Voters as badges of honor for many years of work on environmental initiatives,” Toomey said. “I’m thrilled to have their support because the issues they fight for matter very deeply to me and to our entire community.”
The bar for these environmental endorsements should be set higher — to include such things as votes to support mass transit and leadership on the transition to alternative energy and tightening of car emissions standards. Toomey contributed to the fiscal crisis of the MBTA by voting to make it responsible for the Big Dig debt. Also, he is not known as a forceful and prominent advocate for the Green conversion of the Massachusetts economy and infrastructure. Given the scope of our environmental problems, that is what we need. Meanwhile, his opponent, Mike Connolly, says he wants to make exerting leadership on addressing environmental crisis a top priority. To stop the ecological catastrophe that is heading our way, we absolutely need politicians who are willing to do that.
Ah yes, the Connolly people know better than evertyone else. I’ll take the advice of the Sierra Club and the Mass Leagues of Environmental Voters every day over the opinions of either Connolly supporters, who have proven themselves ignorant of the facts (as I hear from many people who have been visted by Connolly canvassers), or the Connolly campaign itself with its innuendo and half truths.
Being willing to question influential organizations and politicians is what we all should do as independent, critical thinking citizens. Let’s hope the voters don’t just blindly “take advice,” “take opinions” and follow certain local hearsay (from a particular side) as the previous commentator seems to do. Dismissing any criticism of Tim Toomey and certain organizations who support him as “the Connolly people” rather than dealing with their substance also serves the voting public poorly. I would hope that Toomey supporters would have the integrity to respond to substantive criticisms of their candidate’s actions in a way that is more fact based and respectful of the intelligence of voters. Consistent insults and condescension from the friends of Tim Toomey can start to reflect badly on the candidate himself and his attitude toward his constituents.
It is because the Connolly fans, most of whom live outside the district (and even the state) if Connolly’s Facebook page is any indication, have bought into his innuendo and half truths with little or no understanding of the facts. We heard the real Mike Connolly on WRKO last week and it was an embarrasment. Interesting how he hasn’t promoted his appearance on WRKO on his website or Facebook. He has jumped at promoting every other mention of his name.
Notice how the above commentator continues to make various negative assertions about Connolly and his campaign without properly backing them up. Maybe he hasn’t been out on the street in different parts of the district, where there are many “fans” of Connolly. Perhaps he has been spending too much time on Facebook. It doesn’t bother me that Connolly may have fans elsewhere too who understandably communicate with the campaign through Facebook. That is an indication of how inspirational his anti-status quo message has become. The commentator also keeps referring to “innuendo and half truths” and the so-called “facts” without being specific. Not at all convincing.
By contrast, the criticisms of Toomey in this campaign have been very concrete and on the mark — for example his having a second fulltime job as a Cambridge City Councillor (objectively reducing the amount of time he has to work as a State Rep.), the documented fact that he has one of the worst attendance records at the State House (not a coincidence) and Toomey’s longstanding opposition to freedom of choice with respect to abortion (which is out of step with many if not most of his constituents). These are inconvenient truths that the friends of Toomey have no answer for. Instead, they try to distract people with unsubstantiated, inflammatory and heavily biased claims about Connolly and his campaign. If after twenty years, this is the best defense that the Toomey camp can muster, is it a surprise that Toomey now is facing an increasingly popular challenger?
Hi Microman — in response to your comment above — the only thing that was embarrassing about my appearance on WRKO last week was the angry, hate-filled tone of the questions and comments.
I agreed to appear on the show because I thought it would be a good opportunity to find common ground on the issue of money in politics and the need to create new alternatives to the status quo on Beacon Hill. And to that extent, my appearance was a success.
However, when the conversation shifted to the so-called “issues”, there was an obvious disconnect between the issues that are embodied by our progressive campaign for State Representative and the issues that were on the minds of the conservative callers.
Virtually all of the callers wanted to cut social programs and go after certain disadvantaged members of our society, but I want to do the opposite (by expanding social programs and working to create a more egalitarian society).
All in all, I felt like the show was a waste of time, but nevertheless I am proud of the fact that I stuck to my principles in the middle of a very hostile environment.
In the end, I did not promote the show because I felt like some of the comments were insensitive, rude, inaccurate, and downright frightening.
Having the courage to defend your opinions before an hostile augience is the sign of a real leader. You miserably failed to do so.
Another over the top, insulting comment from the aptly named Microman. No interest in any serious dialog, just like the the WRKO people. It barely deserves to be dignified by a comment, which is how Connolly probably felt. Where does Toomey get these guys?
The truth hurts. It is very telling that Mr. Connolly couldn’t remotely defend his positions when questioned by a right-wing zealot like Michelle McPhee.
Microman is obviously a moron from his/her comments (although we could have figured that out from the fact that he/she listens to WRKO and would talk about it in public).
I do think there is some truth to the innuendo bit, though. One of Mike Connolly’s main messages is that Tim Toomey has two jobs and that fact effects the quality of his representation of his legislative district (as his surrogate Somervillain has pointed out). So far, Mike Connolly has produced one questionable example. In the last debate he said that Toomey did not adequately inform Somerville of the Craigie Dam closure in late 2010. As Toomey has been pointing out since that debate, it’s not true. As I understand it, the first word that Somerville got about that project actually came from Toomey himself months ahead of time. Doesn’t that mean that Toomey is the ONLY one in state government that cared to tell Somerville? He even organized a public meeting about the project.
Not to mention that at the end of the day, the Dam closure actually made traffic better in the area, as people who lived here at that time would know.
Swing and a miss, Mike.
Connolly also brought up Toomey’s attendance. Toomey was present for 96% of votes. Council meets on Monday nights, but legislative sessions do not. I doubt it was City Council that made Toomey miss those votes. Pretty clearly innuendo.
Another swing and a miss.
I’ve noticed that Toomey supporters have the condescending habit of calling opponents of Toomey “surrogates,” implying that anyone who actively supports the opponent must be his puppet. It suggests a disturbing sense of disconnection from the level of popular dissatisfaction in the district with the reign of Tim Toomey and his entrenched patronage network.
Stating that Toomey may have had had a 95% attendance record last year may sound good, but this constitutes eight missed votes, more than any other Cambridge Representative or Senator, according to the Beacon Hill Roll Call. Those were all important votes, I am sure. Could it be that these absences are related to the fact that Toomey has a second political job? Possibly, even if his meetings for his second job don’t directly conflict with the roll calls on Beacon Hill. Only Toomey knows.
The larger point is that when your so-called fulltime Representative has another fulltime political job, something has to give somewhere. There are only so many hours in the day, and it is the constituents who will pay the price. Even if Toomey was present for 100% of his votes, there still is the more important the matter of how much time and energy he is putting into pushing important statewide issues on Beacon Hill. There is the substantial and growing perception in the district that he is not doing nearly enough in that regard, especially in comparison to other Reps in the area who have only one job.
To dismiss those concerns or to denigrate them as “innuendo” or “half truths” is to ignore the legitimate frustration by constituents who would prefer to have a real fulltime Representative making more of a statewide impact. Given how entrenched the political and economic status quo is in this state, we know that what we really need is someone willing to work OVERTIME for progressive change in the State House. Objectively with respect to his available time, his past behavior, and his positions on various issues, Tim Toomey is not that person. Of course, that probably is not the kind of Representative these pro-Toomey posters really want.
I have found this race quite interesting. It has definitely seemed to increase the traffic and comment volume on CambridgeDay.
I read the many comments and responses and I am left with some questions, mostly for Mike:
1) You mention that you want to create a more egalitarian society in your response. What exactly do you mean by this? More equal in opportunity? More equal in outcomes? Both. It sounds very good, but there is the need for more depth that could not be found in your comment or on your website.
As an example, if you are pushing for egalitarianism how would you propose that we handle the disparity in resources available between the Cambridge Public Schools and the Somerville Public Schools?
2) You mention that you want to expand social programs and other similar services, but you do not show how they will be paid for. I looked at your website to see if there was a plan for where the funds to cover these added expenditures would come from, but I could find none, so could you respond with specifics on how that would happen? And please try and stay away from the Republican talking points of fraud, waste, abuse or the let’s increase taxes on the rich unless you can identify what would be eliminated or on whom (incomes, etc.) the taxes would be raised.
3) I did not hear your radio appearance, but you seem to disparage the callers to the show in your comment above. As a state representative, are you not supposed to represent the entire district and not just those with whom you agree? Yet, it seems, from your comment, that you will not work with Republicans and Conservative Democrats who do not agree with your “progressive campaign”? Did I read the comment wrong?
4) Finally, you make a big point (and very nicely in many articles linked to your web site) about accepting no money which is refreshing. Yet, you receive and accept in-kind contributions. So what, in your opinion is the difference in accepting cash or accepting materials? Is there a real difference r is it more form over substance? (From a PR perspective it has been a big plus so my hat is off to you on how well you managed that aspect of the campaign.)
Thanks and best of luck.
If you know ANYTHING about the way Beacon Hill actually works, you’ll know that the chances of Rep. Toomey’s vote changing the outcome of any of the 8 roll calls he missed is essentially zero. Yet another swing and a miss…pretty sure that’s 3 strikes! (And nope, I’m /not/ a Toomey supporter.)
Does the last commentator know which particular eight votes Toomey missed, and how much that actually affected the outcome of those votes? And it doesn’t really matter if our Rep. shows up to vote? With a mentality like that I can see why some people could care less if we have a fulltime Rep.
In any case, this still overlooks the more important question about how much time and energy is takes to craft and push important new progressive legislation and to fight against the entrenched interests that would oppose it. If that doesn’t matter to you, then you might as well go for Toomey. The more Toomey types we have in the legislature, the more you can be assured that the status quo will not be challenged.
If we could only find a way to harness the hot air in this comment thread we’d never need fossil fuels again.
Here’s is a comparison of data points for Cambridge and Somerville public schools about which I would appreciate Mr. Connolly or his supporters perspective on. All data is from Mass Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for 2011 to keep numbers consistent as possible between cities.
City. Cambridge. Somerville
Total students. 6,052. 4,877
Total Expenditure. $171.3 M. $87.4 M
PPE. $26,305. $16,108
As you can see the City of Somerville spends approximately $10,000 per pupil less than the City of Cambridge. So how does this fit into your theory of egalitarianism? Do you have any explanation for the vast difference between the two communities? If you consider this a problem how would you propose to solve it?
Education is critical for preparing for future success and one of the major priorities of Mass lawmakers so your approach here is critical.
Again, thanks.
It is no surprise that the Mass League of Environmental Voters and the Sierra Club pitch their support behind Toomey. It’s an unfortunate and cynical calculus, but it would be foolish to argue that it is an ineffective strategy. These groups have an agenda (most of which I support), and they correctly reckon that Tim Toomey, the incumbent, will have the job for life and is therefore the most deserving of their endorsement.
These groups are not saying that Toomey is the best advocate for their cause, but rather that he is the surest bet to win the election, and so have some chance to help their cause.
So dare to dream, folks. Imagine that the overwhelming advantage of incumbency, conferred in large part by a campaign finance system that requires politicians to engage in relentless fundraising, permitted thoughtful, hardworking, intelligent citizens of good conscience to mount a viable campaign.
I suspect we’d have better candidates, like Mike Connolly, for example?
Enuff_guff, truly, you are endowed with remarkable gift for reading minds. Professor Charles Xavier can help you harness your gift, for it is indeed a gift, though I’m sure it sometimes feels like a curse.
More to the point, how dare these two groups make a decision you disagree with! Obviously, you think Mike Connolly is the answer to everything, and the Sierra Club apparently didn’t get the memo that someone died and made you the new Pope of Environ-Town.
Jamie, again, what’s with the weird stuff you make up?
Your “It’s obvious” observations about what I think are nonsense. Stop making stuff up.
Memos about me? Pope? What is this crap?