Thursday, March 26, 2009

Deval's answer to critics of Senator Walsh's 175K pay

Senate Republicans blasted Gov. Deval Patrick’s choice of UMass dean Stephen P. Crosby to review salaries at the state’s 52 quasi-independent agencies yesterday, saying somebody “more independent” is needed.

Patrick tapped Crosby - a former secretary of administration and finance to GOP Govs. Paul Cellucci and Jane M. Swift - for the 90-day study after the flap over Sen. Marian Walsh’s $175,000 job at an obscure funding agency.

Ok... sports fans, Deval has appointed an insider to review the salaries of the independent state agencies. What a great idea.... and I'll bet in 90 days, Mr. Crosby will write in a press release, that all of these groups salaries are within excepted levels of comparable private businesses. Thus.. Senator Walsh will be making that 175K in 90 days. Any takers?

12 Comments:

At March 27, 2009 at 1:35 PM , Blogger Jamie said...

I would not take that bet. If I did, I would lose. This is just another example of Deval being sleezy at the expense of the taxpayer. At this point, nothing he does could get me to ever vote for him again.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 1:45 PM , Blogger Framingham resident said...

Jim, state Constitution, what does it say about grounds for impeaching the Governor, and does it say anything about impeaching the entire sitting congressional caucus? Serious questions here, I am not kidding. Can we do this?

 
At March 27, 2009 at 1:48 PM , Blogger Eric said...

I got a question for you. How much is Patrick paying this guy to look into this?

 
At March 27, 2009 at 1:58 PM , Blogger Worried 01701 said...

I give up. If he does not get that this is unethical, if he has to hire someone to make that decision for him, then what does that say about his ethics? Not that there was any doubt in my mind, his behavior in the last 60 days has led me to believe that he is a sneek and a liar, and completely out of touch with reality.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 2:54 PM , Blogger Jim Pillsbury said...

There are people who are working on the recall point and I'm trying to understand the process. As far as I can see and read, we do have recourse to recall all of them. The bigger question would, for me be, could we gather enough signatures in Framigham lets say to recall Pam? Do more than 50% of the voters feel she should go away? On the State level, it would have to be millions of signatures to get Deval out, unless he pulled a Bohoavich from Illinois. Doable, if we had the outreach and publicity. And there seems to be no end to their blatant thumbing of us all. The Herald shows Deval's ratings tanking badly and our survey on http://GradeMaStateHouse.blogspot.com is overwhelmingly against the State House in terms of approval. It'll take some time to get all this going... hang tuff

Eric.. this guys salary is 175,000.

As I written, I didn't vote for Deavl, but will support him, if he shows any signs of supporting us... but man... his Caddy alone is costing us big money in gas.

I've run out of ways to morally support him.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 3:15 PM , Blogger Anderson said...

We keep talking about how bad they are, and they keep getting worse. Why is it that there is no mechanism in place to hold them accoutable for their actions? Patrick must know he can get away with this, or he would not do it. Where does he friend Obama weigh in on his actions, now that would be something interesting to know. But that poor man has his hands full without dealing with the antics of some low life like Patrick.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 3:40 PM , Blogger Brian V. said...

Pillsbury is right about it taking millions of votes to do anything about all of them. Grass roots efforts still take a lot of work to organize and get them up and running, as he can probably vouch for having done this type of thing for the ballot question on legalizing pot. But if I am not mistaken, some one gave him a whole lot of money to get that question on the ballot. To undertake a real effort to kick them all out would take that same investment of money. Realistically, our best shout might be to wait for the next election and just out vote them. Jim, what do you think is the best way to approach this?

 
At March 27, 2009 at 4:29 PM , Blogger Old soldier said...

Jim are you saying we are paying this guy 175K just to look into whether Walsh's pay is fair? Does he do anything else or just work for 90 days and then file for his pension?

 
At March 27, 2009 at 5:08 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is like having the fox watch the hen house. Does he think we are dumb enough to think this is ethical? Well, maybe we really are that dumb, at least some of you out there are. He is a loser, and time to stop supporting his decisions.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 5:09 PM , Blogger Fred J. said...

How about we, as the voters, insist on an ethics committee made up of voters, we figure out how to make it fair. You sit on the committee for a year, no pay, and you investigate and vote on any issue that may be unethical, and the vote is binding. It would solve the problem of this type of thing being done, and it might even deter some of these losers from running for office if they knew they could not get away with stuff.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 5:27 PM , Blogger Doreen said...

Morally support him. That is the tough issue. I still think the guy has the right make up to do this job well, but he is getting all caught up in the old boy behavior. Ask me, I think if you had an honest, hard working legislature in place, the Governor would be much better at his job. But then, we don’t have an honest or hard working legislative body, so why fantasize about what would happen if we did. But sometimes, I just can’t help thinking about how good and strong the people of MA are, and what a good state we could be to live and work in if some of those good, honest, hardworking people could only get elected. Never will happen here though, the old school dems have a iron hold on the reigns of power in this state.

 
At March 27, 2009 at 5:37 PM , Blogger Jim Pillsbury said...

Soldier,

No.. he's not a new hire.. just for this. He's already making that money... but why now and why him and why do this at all?

God... we know this position hasn't been filled for 12 years... why? because its not needed, so does Deval want a lacky to support the 175k in salary? That's what seems to be going on.. maybe not. It's hard for me to understand what he's looking to get from this.

Fred... none of these meetings are open to us.

And last week, March 16 to the
20th, the House met for 5 hours and 38 minutes and the Senate met for 5 hours and 26 minutes. Seems like so little time spent on ethics reform and financial issue

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home