Chris Asselin doesn't deserve public office

I didn't think I'd be writing about former state rep and convicted felon Christopher Asselin on my blog quite as soon as today, but two events this weekend made me change my mind.

On Friday, a Facebook friend posted a question on his page,  asking if an "honest mistake" is deserving of latitude if an individual's ethics are in question.  I wrote back, aiming for a little humor :Sure, unless it's Chris Asselin!  Later, I noticed my comment had been removed, and when I checked my friend's friends, sure enough, Chris was among them.

Then, yesterday, I was dress-shopping at the Goodwill on Boston Rd. when I heard a voice saying, "OK, guys, that's enough, time to move on."  Something made me look up-- and it was Chris Asselin!  Now, I've met Chris exactly once in my life, when I paid him a legislative visit, and I doubt he knew who I was, but he said "Hello." and I said hello back.  I don't like to be rude to someone in front of children.

But I feel  obliged to say exactly what I think about Chris Asselin's attempt to regain his state representative seat.

He's an idiot!   He's crazy!  What a jerk!  What an asshole!  He's learned NOTHING!  I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him!

There, now that I have that out of my system, let me explain my thinking.

The Asselin family (those who were charged and convicted) stole from every taxpayer in the city, more than $4 million, if you put it all together, but, in particular, they stole from  poor people, from those who suffer the most and have the least to give.  They lived high on the hog, with nice houses in Springfield and a vacation home on Cape Cod.  If anyone needs a reminder, see this history of corruption in Springfield, which includes the indictment of nine members of the Asselin family.

Now Chris may not be responsible for everything other family members did--  Daddy certainly set a poor example-- but this is what he did admit to: 

As part of a plea deal, Christopher Asselin admitted accepting up to $120,000 in bribes from authority contractors funneled through his father – including improvements to his Springfield home and a swimming pool. He also admitted the same contractors made illegal campaign contributions and financed flyers, signs and fund-raisers  (Emphasis mine.)  Masslive.

Folks who know me are aware that I'm not particularly pro-incarceration, and I wish judges were allowed more creativity in sentencing.  I'd have preferred the judge had sentenced Chris to live in a half-way house for 18 months, with his days spent serving the poor (instead of costing the taxpayers even MORE money).  Chris could have worked third shift at the Worthington St. Shelter, served meals at Loaves and Fishes, helped prepare the bodies of the indigent for burial, washed floors at Arise or the Open Pantry-- you get the idea.That's not what happened, of course, but at least he served his time.

I also support ex-felons' right to vote-- it's a way to share in the responsibility of being a member of society-- BUT-- anyone who has ever been convicted of election fraud in any form should never be allowed to seek public office again.  Is there any one of our current state legislators who'd be willing to introduce such a law?

 How pathetic.  I don't like criticizing people personally and don't usually feel the need to do so.  Chris says he wants a second chance and he deserves one-- but not a second chance at political office, especially when illegal campaign contributions helped him win his first state representative seat.  Please, Chris, do yourself, your family and the residents of Springfield a favor and withdraw from the race.  I don't know in what direction your redemption lies, but it is not toward Boston.  Please.

Iran's regime lousy at photoshipping

Funny and awful at the same time..President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has to resort to photophopping to make his crowd of supporters look bigger than it is! See Daily Kos for analysis and links.

Homeless man denied right to run for office

Daniel Fore goes to every village council meeting in Oak Park, ILL and speaks at most of them. This year he decided to run for a seat on the village council. The elections will be held April 7.

But the three-person electoral board has decided that Mr. Fore has no right to run and will be kept off the ballot. The reason? Mr. Fore is homeless. Although he has a post office box in Oak Park, and says that is where he lives, there is no "proof" he actually lives there, the electoral board decided.

The one dissenting vote on the electoral board, Village President Daniel Pope, who thinks Mr. Fore should be allowed to run, admits it would be difficult for another resident to challenge Mr. Fore's residency. State law requires a candidate's nominating petitions to include their place of residence with "the street and number thereof, if any."

Mr. Fore has lawyers who will assist him in filing with the state court on the grounds that the phrase "if any" would allow a homeless person to run for office.

Voting rights for homeless people have become better-established over the last twenty years, with people living in shelters allowed to register and vote in 49 states (data for North Dakota not available). People living on the streets have the same right to vote in all but two states. Only ten states, however, have enacted legislation giving voting rights to the homeless.

The National Coalition for the Homeless has a wealth of materials on homeless rights and registration. As more and more people become homeless, attempt of homeless people to run for
office is bound to become more common.

Photo from the Chicago Tribune.

Early voting for Massachusetts?

Just got a call at home from a guy who said his mom suggested he call me. He's a truck driver who was just told by his boss that he's going to have to make an unexpected trip to New York tomorrow, leaving at 4 a.m. and not returning until after the polls close.

"'How am I supposed to vote?'" he tells me he asked his boss. "He told me I could take the day off without pay if I wanted, but I've got four kids-- can't afford to do that."

He went down to the Election Commission about 2 pm. to see if he could get an absentee ballot only to be told that they stopped giving out applications at noon. It's the law, he was told.

I had to reassure him, while not wanting at all to make it seem that his vote was unimportant, that our state was definitely going to go for Obama. Of course there's important questions, state rep races, etc.

"I know, I know," he said. "I just wanted to be a part of history."

When things settle down a bit I'll research the possibilities of early voting in Massachusetts.

Meanwhile, I'm a nervous wreck about the Presidential election, and headed off to an Arise board meeting, which I hope will distract me.

Homeless in MA? Not too late to register to vote!

Alberta Jilsen, resident of the PIP Shelter (Worcester), and registered voter.

One of Arise's members, Lamont, has been going around to the single shelters in the Springfield, MA registering homeless people to vote and Liz has been scheduling for the family shelters. We've registered more than 50 so far, and can probably double that by the deadline next Wednesday, October 15. Of course, getting folks out to vote, whether homeless or not, is another story. Then again, if not this election, then when?

You can get a state by state chart of homeless voting rights at the National Coalition for the Homeless website.

Photo by Lauren Farina at Worcesterhomeless

Know/are a felon in MA? You can VOTE! Spread the word

"Hey, would you like to vote so you can participate in this historic election?"

A pause.

"Well, I'd like to, but I can't-- I'm a convicted felon."

Many felons in Massachusetts think they've permanently lost the right to vote and much of that misconception was created in the year 2000, when a successful ballot question removed the right to vote for convicted felons while they were serving their time. But as soon as a person is released, his or her right to vote is restored.

In fact, more than half of the prisoners in Massachusetts county jail are still eligible to register and to vote, because more than half of them are pre-trial-- not yet found guilty of any crime-- and a number of those who have been sentenced are serving time for a misdemeanor. All of those prisoners are eligible to vote.

More than four years ago, Holly Richardson and I, representing Arise for Social Justice, met with Hampden County Sheriff Mike Ashe and some of his program staff. We were there to speak against the construction of a new women's jail, even though we knew it was nearly unstoppable. One of the points were were there to make was that no real shortage in women's beds really existed if the pre-trial population could be reduced-- either through lighter bails or released on their own recognisance. While we were there, we asked if the county jail made any effort to get those who were eligible registered to vote and assist them to get absentee ballots. They did not, but agreed to consider "making that option available."

I am happy to report that although the administrators don't exactly run a campaign, they do make information available to prisoners about their right to register and vote. I put in a call to the program director at the Hampshire County jail, and they were happy to be provided with voter registration and absentee ballot forms. Unfortunately, I doubt most county jails are proactive unless pushed.

After years of state by state felony disenfranchisement, the tide may finally be turning to restore voting rights. According to the Sentencing Project, in the last ten years,

• Nine states either repealed or amended lifetime disenfranchisement laws
• Two states expanded voting rights to persons under community supervision
• Five states eased the restoration process for persons seeking to have their right to vote restored after completing their sentence
• Three states improved data and information sharing.

Still, some five million people will be unable to vote in this year's Presidential election.

As well as having the highest number of incarcerated persons in the world, the U.S. also denies more people convicted of a crime the right to vote than any other democratic country. In some countries, the ballot box is even brought to the prison. In dozens of countries in Europe and the Americas, all 5.3 million disenfranchised felons would have the right to vote.

If you are personally affected by felony disenfranchisement laws, or know someone who is, don't assume you or your friend can't vote. Find out! With times the way they are, hang on to every bit of power we have. You can get a state by state guide to felony enfranchisement laws at the Sentencing Project.

The deadline to register to vote in Massachusetts is October 15.

AP Photo by Brennan Linsley

For what it's worth: no free ride for Sarno

I know that many Springfield residents have been feeling downright blackmailed by Governor Patrick's proposal to extend our loan from the state from 5 to 12 years. Why? Because in order to get this extension, we also have to go along with three other, much more distasteful provisions-- creating a new position in Springfield government for a "Chief Financial Officer," increasing the mayor's salary, and extending the mayor's term from two to four years. This binding question will be on our November ballot.

One concern citizens have had is whether the four year term would extend to Mayor Sarno's current term. I am pleased to report that the four year term provision (and, probably, the salary increase) would not take affect until the first election after the question is passed.

Our local Election Office has not yet received the wording of any of the questions which will be on the ballot this fall. This is a perennial problem and it gives them very little time to print and prepare the ballot. To get an answer, I talked to the Election Division of the Secretary of State's Office. Interestingly enough, they were unable to find any info except for the mayor's term question, which makes me wonder: will these provisions really all be in one question-- in other words, take the whole package or get nothing-- or if they will be separate questions after all.

Tomorrow on my lunch break I'll call the Governor's office and see what else I can find out. Or does someone already know the answer?

Vote for Nobody

Really, I'm the perpetual optimist, but this was too good not to share. Found at Tinypic.

Teeny, tiny, PATHETIC correction

Spoke to Jim Gillen, City Desk editor at the Republican yesterday-- asked him WHY the paper keeps getting the ward representation deadline wrong. He said, "Don't worry, we'll take care of it."

So in this morning's paper, inside section bottom of left side, about ONE INCH that says

CORRECTION
Springfield: State law requires the city get approval to put a question on the Nov. 6 ballot ny Oct. 2. The date was incorrect in a newsbrief and editorial yesterday, due to an editing error.

That's the whole thing. Why didn't the paper mention the question under discussion is ward representation? A little context would have been more than appropriate.

Back your ballot with a paper record

Uncomfortable with electronic voting that does not produce a paper record? You can go to Common Cause and send a letter to your Representative in support of the Holt bill, coming up soon in the House for a vote.

I was wrong by a day

Talked to our lawyer Nadine Cohen who remembered clearly info from the Secretary of State's office-- the ward representation legislation must become law 35 not 36 days before the city election. Yipee.

Ward Representation - will we even have a chance to vote for it?

What a frustrating day yesterday was. I returned a call from Candace Lopes, Sen. Buoniconti's aide, and I knew was bad news even before I called.

No, the Senate had not voted on the home rule legislation for ward representation-- in fact, the House hadn't even finished voting. And even after the legislation is passed, it still has to be signed by the Governor-- all before what I believe to be the deadline for getting a question on the ballot-- next Monday, October 1. Candace said the rumor was that a House member from Western Mass-- no identity known-- was holding the legislation up.

I called Rep. Ben Swan, a longtime ward rep supporter, who said he hoped it would finish being voted on this Thursday, but that it really wasn't up to him, it was up to the House leadership-- that means Speaker of the House Salvatore DiMasi. So I called his office and talked (of course) to an aide.

Then I called the Governor's office to make sure he was going to be in town to sign the legislation, should it pass both houses of the Legislature. Of course that's like trying to talk to God, but I did speak to his legislative director who said that getting the Governor to sign was not that simple-- that it often took 30 days or more while the Governor did "due diligence" on the legislation.

During the day other ward rep supporters called their state representatives. The responses ranged from pretty clueless to informed and ready to vote favorably; everyone denied being "the one" to hold the bill up.

Then I called Mayor Ryan's office, for the fourth time since August, to ask him the same thing-- PLEASE be in touch with the Western Mass. legislators and tell them to move the home rule petition forward. Later in the day I was told by a mayor's aide that Mayor Ryan was, that very day, writing a letter to the reps-- too little, too late for a mayor who is supposed to be a ward rep supporter (as is his mayoral opposition, Domenic Sarno, at least for the last couple years).

Finally I called Mike Plaisance, reporter at the Springfield Republican, to fill him in on what was (not) happening. He called me later and said he'd been told by the city's Election office that the question could go on the Springfield ballot as late as October 19. Now that's not what I was told by the Election office, (and not one of the city councilors, state reps or city lawyers that I've talked to over the last several months have challenged that date-- maybe they just don't know) so my job today is to clarify what the real deadline is.

If it's October 19, terrific. Of course that gives us grassroots folks even less time to campaign among the city's registered voters. However, even that date probably doesn't guarantee that the Legislature will finish doing it's job.

And they wonder why people are cynical about voting and politics.

Stealing the next presidential election

"Right now it’s just a petition drive on its way to becoming a ballot initiative in California. But you should think of it as a tropical depression that could develop into a major storm that blows away the Democrats’ chances of winning the White House next year."

So begins Bob Herbert's begins his NYimes editorial published Friday, September 21. While Democrats debate the merits of the eight presidential candidates, Republicans have come up with a scheme to steal the next presidential election. Read it, we've all got to know what's going on. Also read Doug Kendall's Slate piece. For a local report, check out the California Progressive Report.

Same Day Registration

From Act for Change

The Massachusetts legislature is poised to make history in the coming weeks. A bill to allow Election Day Registration (EDR) -- a measure that would protect every eligible citizen's right to vote -- is about to face a do-or-die committee vote. If it passes out of committee, it will be well on its way to becoming the law of the land.

Increasing civic participation is good for our democracy. Allowing registration on Election Day makes voting easier and brings people into the electoral process who are often excluded -- like students, renters, low-income people, and those who have recently moved. We need a groundswell of support for this legislation from the public to pass it into law.

Contact your legislator here: