The Boston Globe
Sunday, December 16, 2001
2002 House revolt vowed
Dissidents seek Finneran ouster
By Rick Klein
Globe Staff
After years of complaints about House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran's autocratic rule, his
critics in the House say they will challenge his leadership in a showdown on the House floor
next month.
House dissidents say they are pleasantly surprised by the outpouring of anger aimed at
Finneran that has surfaced in the wake of the recent protracted struggle over the state
budget. They'll use the next few days to poll members and plot strategy
and are seriously considering a bid to strip the speaker of power.
"There is going to be a fight in January," said Representative J. James Marzilli Jr., an
Arlington Democrat and an outspoken Finneran critic. "People are going to be held
responsible. You can't avoid taking a stand on this. Tom Finneran will be sure of that."
Finneran could not be reached yesterday, and his spokesman, Charles Rasmussen, declined
to comment. But a top member of Finneran's leadership team said she doubts that the
insurgents have recruited anywhere near the 50-plus members they say are
solidly behind efforts to buck the speaker's leadership.
House Majority Whip Lida E. Harkins said that Finneran's perennial critics are lining up with
a few House members who are unhappy about being passed over for key legislative posts.
"I don't think there's enough juice to it," said Harkins, a Needham Democrat. "I just haven't
seen anything but a few dissidents who are never going to be happy with the current
leadership and who choose to work outside of the system, through the media, to create
controversy and dissidence."
A measure to remove Finneran from the speaker's post would require a majority of those
present and voting in the 160-member House. It's not clear whether the insurgents are
close to that threshold, or whether Finneran will allow a vote on the matter.
Harkins said Finneran still enjoys the confidence of the vast majority of House members. She
predicted that Finneran will never face a serious challenge as long as he serves as
speaker.
"If you look at most of the votes, it's not that we're winning a vote by one or two," Harkins
said. "We're winning votes by large majorities."
Still, many House members are angry over a series of actions taken by Finneran this year. He
led the charge to kill the voter-approved Clean Elections Law, and his critics say that he
used congressional and legislative redistricting to punish his political enemies.
Some representatives were angered most recently by the state budget, when most members
had less than 24 hours to review and vote on $650 million in cuts prepared by a small
handful of lawmakers. Some members said they were misled regarding the
severity of those cuts, especially those to local aid and to services for mentally ill and mentally retarded
people.
"There are many members who feel disenfranchised as elected members of the Legislature,"
said Representative Stephen Kulik, a Worthington Democrat. "We need to have a very
thorough evaluation and a changing of rules. Changing of leadership needs to be part of the
discussion, whether it's now or further down the road."
Insurgents say they have a broad-based and bipartisan coalition ready to take on
Finneran. But the movement remained mostly subterranean yesterday, with many members hesitant to
take a public stand against the powerful speaker.
Although Republicans -- who are harshly critical of Finneran's leadership -- would constitute
a natural alliance for the dissident Democrats, many are not on board. Finneran
came to power in 1996 because he garnered GOP support, and many still favor having a fiscal
conservative at the helm.
Representative Reed V. Hillman said that House members must rise to protest
antidemocratic actions when they occur before they look to change who's in charge.
"There's 159 of us and one of him. Who's got the power? We do," said Hillman, a
Sturbridge Republican. "Even though I'm upset with the process, I'm willing to work with the
existing structure of the House to change that. I'm not ready at this point to throw Tom
Finneran overboard."
But the dissidents are calculating that the time is ripe for a challenge to Finneran. Lawmakers
who are close to the Mattapan Democrat are beginning to feel some heat in their
districts because of the negative public perception of the House and its leadership.
Representative Maryanne Lewis of Dedham, one of Finneran's floor division chairs, already
has two announced challengers for next year's elections, and both are criticizing her for
being too close to the speaker. Opponents of Representative Nancy Flavin of Easthampton, a top
House budget-writer, recently ran newspaper advertisements in her district
questioning her stance -- and the House leadership position -- on Clean Elections.
Other lawmakers may decide that they can no longer offer blind loyalty to Finneran, said
Representative Jay R. Kaufman, a Lexington Democrat.
"There's an accumulation of frustration and disappointment, coupled with the prospect of
needing to run for reelection," Kaufman said. "Every one of the members of the House has to
think about whether they can defend the status quo."
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Monday, December 17, 2001
Speaker sees no danger of ouster
Finneran calls support still wide
By Ralph Ranalli
Globe Staff
Dismissing the leaders of a legislative revolt as a small group of serial critics bent on
"exploiting" the state's fiscal woes for political gain, House Speaker Thomas Finneran said
yesterday that he doesn't believe his job is in danger.
The Mattapan Democrat said his home answering machine was "jammed" over the weekend
with supportive messages from House members after Globe stories detailing the pending
challenge to his leadership. His detractors, he confidently predicted, will
be able to muster only a fraction of the votes necessary to unseat him.
"This outpouring of support tells me that the very large majority -- which I would say is
growing -- of members want to have continuity," the speaker said. "They want a very steady
hand."
The Globe first reported Friday that a broad-based group of representatives, including a
member of the House leadership, was seeking to unseat Finneran, accusing him of having an
autocratic style and cutting them out of the budget process.
Some lawmakers say they must explain painful budget cuts to constituents that they
themselves weren't given time to study before the long-delayed 2001 budget was rushed
through the House at the last minute.
Finneran said the rapid decline in the US economy, not his management style, particularly
after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was to blame for the state's fiscal crisis. He is now a
target, he said, because nobody likes shrinking budgets and revenue cuts.
"After Sept. 11, there seems to be a frustration that pivots around the need to vilify
someone," Finneran said. "Someone has to be the bad guy. But I also think that almost
everyone understands that it's the economy; we're all victims to the economy. We lost $1
billion in tax revenue."
Finneran did say that improvements to the budget process were needed and that he already
was working to avoid a similar last-minute crunch next year.
During a telephone interview before stepping out to buy a Christmas tree, Finneran said he
didn't relish playing the role of Scrooge to families of the mentally retarded, to charter
school advocates, and other groups affected by the cuts.
"I am as frustrated as anyone, perhaps more so, because the buck stops at my desk," he
said. "It breaks my heart."
He insisted, however, that there was an upside to the budget mess -- the vindication of his
push to build up the state's rainy day fund during the first five years of his six-year
tenure, when tax collections were setting yearly records. Money taken out of the fund prevented the
need for as much as $775 million in additional cuts, which would have meant disaster for
many crucial state programs, he said.
"I was criticized then by this same band of critics," Finneran said. "They wanted to spend that
money in those years, when I and many others said it would be wise to put it away."
Representatives who have been critical of Finneran say they and many colleagues feel his
tight control over budgets and all significant legislation has made them feel increasingly
irrelevant to the legislative process on Beacon Hill.
"I did not start off being revolutionary, I just wanted to do my job," said Representative
Daniel E. Bosley, a North Adams Democrat, who as chairman of the Government
Regulations Committee is part of Finneran's leadership team. "It's becoming
increasingly difficult."
Bosley and others say rank-and-file frustration grew into outright anger when Finneran and
the Senate dragged out budget negotiations for five months, then forced the lawmakers to
vote on a controversial plan -- which included hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts to social
services -- less than 24 hours after it was made public. Some members said they weren't told
by Finneran of all the provisions in the budget plan, and learned of some of the changes in the
newspaper.
"Members were denied access to information," said Representative J. James Marzilli Jr., an
Arlington Democrat and an outspoken Finneran critic. "Many of them cast votes for this
horrendous budget because there were no clear alternatives."
A measure to remove Finneran from the speaker's post would require a majority of those
present and voting in the 160-member House. Finneran's opponents said they have as many
as 50 votes, but the speaker yesterday insisted the number was far lower, as few as "10 to
20" hard-core opponents who have never liked his leadership style or fiscally conservative
approach.
"This is a very small minority of vocal critics who, for about five years, have never been
happy with anything," Finneran said.
As for allegations that rank-and-file members were cut out of the budget process, Finneran
said the House held an unprecedented number of caucuses this year where lawmakers were
given a chance to provide input.
His opponents, Finneran said, stood on the sidelines when tough decisions were being made,
and are now trying to gain a political advantage from it.
"This is a small band of critics who refused to specify where they would cut," he said. "They
served an entirely negative function."
Finneran said he believes the state is in for perhaps as many as three to five rough budget
years before things get significantly better. He said he is hopeful that the process
runs more smoothly next year, but he fears that election year posturing by candidates, including Acting
Governor Jane Swift and Senate President Thomas Birmingham, both candidates for
governor, would bog down the process.
"I hope we don't engage in fingerpointing rather than in being serious about the
responsibilities in front of us," Finneran said.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Monday, December 17, 2001
Misleading by example
By Adrian Walker
Globe Columnist
Every action has a reaction, every evolution a revolution.
Thus, it comes as no shock that Speaker Thomas M. Finneran now finds himself under
attack -- I believe self-serving attack -- from some of his lieges in the Massachusetts House.
Anyone would be hard-pressed to defend the recently concluded legislative session, marked
as it was by courageous stands on child circus performers and simulcasting. Most of the
bigger issues were left unresolved and some of those that were settled did not receive
unanimous acclaim, to put it mildly.
Yet it is too easy to blame Finneran for what is wrong with the House. Ultimately, the blame
for this failure of democracy rests not with Finneran but with 159 sheep who for years have
taken responsibility for virtually none of their actions.
Case in point: Outside a Finneran fund-raiser last week, a Clean Elections advocate declared
that most House members would have voted to fund the measure -- if only Finneran had
allowed them to. That is absolutely untrue; most people in the House staunchly oppose givingpeople money to run against them. But Finneran has become the lightning rod, as he
always does. And representatives love having him to hide behind when they take
unpopular action. What's changed is that a fed-up public is less willing to give a pass to the people on
Beacon Hill.
In a phone interview yesterday, Finneran blamed the difficult times -- not the budget process
-- for the public's unease. It was a year of tough choices, he said, and little
wonder people are frustrated. "While a few members may want to vilify someone -- they want to find a
scapegoat for their discontent -- it's the economy, the economy, the economy," he
said. "We are hostages to a very large fiscal and economic problem that is hitting quite severely every
state in the union."
Finneran -- and his apparent lack of concern about the attack would be hard to overstate --
blamed the move to oust him on perhaps 10 to 15 legislators, most of them longtime
foes. "For whatever reason, they can't reconcile themselves to the fact that a very large majority of
the House sees public policy in a very different way than they do," he said.
Counting heads is usually one of the speaker's strengths, but I think he's off in this case.
When Representative Daniel E. Bosley of North Adams, a member of his leadership team,
publicly breaks ranks, it indicates that this has spread beyond the usual band of suspects.
Is Finneran going anywhere? I'll believe it when I see it. His opponents would need 80 votes
to oust him, which they can't get because of the distrust and divisions in the House. Can
they force a vote on his leadership? Maybe, and some believe that would be enough of a victory
to make Finneran a major campaign issue in next year's House races.
Some of what is happening is part of a natural cycle. People want strong leadership, then
they get tired of it, then they chafe under it. The Senate is a case in point. For 17 years it
had its own "autocratic" leader, William M. Bulger, and now it doesn't. The senators simply don't
want to be led that way anymore, refuse to be led that way anymore.
But the House insurgents are hypocrites. For five years, they have hidden behind their
leadership. Now they're revolutionaries. But they aren't -- they're just scared. Some
of them, at least, have decided they're more afraid of their constituents than they are of
Finneran. Some people might call that progress. But when are these people going to get a
conscience and do something because they think it's right, instead of just making sure they're on the right
side of the talk shows? That isn't brave, it's craven.
Yes, the culture in the House must change. There must be a return to debate and democracy.
But Finneran is the embodiment of the problem, not the problem itself. He is what the people
who elected him speaker have allowed him to become. They have to change too, and
probably first.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Monday, December 17, 2001
A Boston Globe editorial
Finneran's challenge
EARLY every day, this newspaper receives a letter to the editor from another
Massachusetts voter fed up with the Legislature, particularly with the leadership of the
House. "I am a proud Massachusetts Democrat who feels I have been somehow
transported to a dictatorship," writes Amy McNamee of Boston. "Something is wrong with our electoral
system, the very heart of our democracy," worries William R. Meyer of Charlestown.
Michael Biales of Acton wonders, "Why have the state representatives not rebelled against
their leaders?"
Some of the readers are angry about House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran's high-handed
refusal to fund the Clean Elections Law, aimed at opening up political races to more
competition. Some are disheartened by state budget cuts that were rammed through
before Thanksgiving with almost no debate. Many are simply appalled at Finneran's undemocratic
exploitation of power.
Often, the voters seem more courageous and outspoken than the House members who have
been so marginalized by Finneran's subjugation. "I am putting my state representative on
notice that I shall not again vote for him until he stands up to
Finneran," writes Bernard Cullen of Boston. Adds Joel Goldstein of Sudbury: "If someone starts a recall petition to get
Thomas Finneran out of his post, let me know. I'll be the first to sign it!"
Now this frustration has found a focus. Over the weekend a small but growing group of
House reformers announced they will challenge Finneran's leadership when the House
convenes for the 2002 session next month. If they can gather the necessary
pledges, they say they will move to vacate the chair.
It is a drastic step provoked by drastically bad leadership. Finneran has driven many of the
brightest, most independent House members out of the Legislature and has targeted the rest
for irrelevance. He does not compromise. It is past time for him to be revisited by the
essence of the democracy he seems to disdain: a political challenge for his seat.
Finneran will be opposed for the Speakership by an erstwhile ally and member of his
leadership team, Representative Daniel Bosley of North Adams. Bosley is no wild-eyed
radical; he only converted to the cause of Clean Elections this February, two
years after voters approved it. "I'm not a revolutionary," he said yesterday. "I just want to do my job."
Bosley is a respected moderate whose challenge is a good indication of just
how untenable Finneran's leadership has become -- and how a move to oust him is not as Quixotic as it may
seem.
Eighty-one House members need the backbone to stand up for democracy. We hope by
January, Sidney Wanzer of Concord will have his answer. He writes: "Where are the voices
of our elected representatives who should be rising up in anger and indignation?"
Return to top
