Dukakis Center News
Q&A: Dukakis on Ted Kennedy
By Lauren McFalls
news@Northeastern | September 1, 2009
In 1962, Edward M. Kennedy won a U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts in his first try at elective office. That same year, a young Harvard Law graduate from Brookline, Mass., named Michael Dukakis ran for and won a seat in the state legislature. During the ensuing 47 years, the two men shared a progressive ideology, a lengthy history of political triumphs and travails, and a personal friendship. Now a Distinguished Professor of Political Science at Northeastern, Dukakis talked yesterday about his relationship with the late senator and the impact of his passing on the current national debate over universal health care, the passion of Kennedy's political career.
How would you sum up Ted Kennedy as a politician?
He was the whole package for me, a remarkable combination of personal commitment and passion for the job, and skills, legislative ability. He never would start a policy initiative without getting a Republican cosponsor.
You know, after Bill Clinton went down to defeat on his 1993 health care plan, he and Ted got together to see what could be done, and decided, OK we'll start with the kids, so they came up with this children's health plan. And Kennedy, as you might guess, was the principal cosponsor in the Senate.
[Republican Senate Majority Leader] Trent Lott knew that Kennedy was looking for a Republican cosponsor. Kennedy had this long-standing personal friendship with [Utah Republican] Orrin Hatch, and when Lott found out that Hatch had agreed to cosponsor the bill, he was just furious. But they put it through -- raised the federal cigarette tax from 24 cents to 67 cents and put it through. That was Kennedy.
Do you remember the first time you worked with him politically?
I'm sure we probably did some things together in the Sixties. But people ask me, "What are your favorite Kennedy stories?" and I've got
two.
I was first elected governor in '74, I was defeated by Ed King in '78, so there was the great rematch in 1982, in the Democratic primary. King was the incumbent Democratic governor, albeit a conservative one; he later switched parties. Still, there was no reason for Teddy to come out 10 days before that election and endorse my candidacy, but he did.
Did you ever ask him about it?
He just thought it was the right thing to do, very similar to when he endorsed Obama in 2008. He was close to the Clintons, and I know they were very hurt and disappointed, but he did it anyway. And I know his endorsement was just as crucial for Obama then as it was for in 1982.
My other favorite memory came about when I signed the universal health care bill in 1988. I'll never forget when Teddy called me, he was just so proud -- of me, of Secretary of Health and Human Services Phil Johnston, of the state. He was incredibly proud that his state was the first in the nation to enact universal health care.
You served as governor for 12 years while Ted was in the Senate, so the two of you must have worked together a lot. Does anything in particular come to mind?
On public transportation, which I'm slightly obsessive about, he was absolutely terrific. This was in my first term, and at the time, you could not bust the highway trust fund, the gasoline tax, you could not use it for public transportation.
I was one of the leaders to fight the so-called Master Highway Plan, which would have -- created a California-style freeway system, eight lanes of elevated highway going right through Frederick Law Olmsted's Emerald Necklace, down Ruggles Street and three feet from the Museum of Fine Arts.
And meanwhile, the T was just a basket case, it was awful, it would break down three days out of five when I took it to work.
So after a 10-year debate, we had killed the Master Highway Plan, and we had given up hundreds of million of dollars in federal highway money, but we thought, why can't we use that for public transportation? And Ted and [former House Speaker Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill Jr.] were largely responsible for making it possible for Massachusetts to become the first state in the nation to be able to use federal highway money for public transportation.
We ended up with $3 billion to invest in the T. We acquired the entire commuter rail system in eastern Massachusetts for $35 million, stations, parking lots, tracks, -- and we could not have done it without Kennedy and Tip's leadership.
What will Ted Kennedy's legacy be -- what do you think he'll stand out for above all?
In a general way, that he was somebody who knew where he stood, and he lived it, practiced it, did it. He had a very strong philosophy, which at times was not in vogue. And yet he never wavered at all. I think subsequent events demonstrated clearly that his values and his approach to public service made a lot more sense than some of the folks who were critical of him.
The one piece he wasn't able to achieve was his goal of health care for everyone, and I hope we're going to do that.
You see people at [health care] rallies holding signs, saying "Do It 4 Teddy." How do you think his passing will change the health care debate?
No question we'd be on our way to a health care bill if Ted Kennedy had been healthy, engaged, and involved. If, for example, there had to be some compromising on a pure public option, because it was Kennedy, the liberal community would accept it because his credentials there were so strong.
I'm not saying we can't get a health care bill, but there is no one with the unique set of skills and the respect that he had.
My own view is that the Democrats will have 60 votes for cloture, assuming Massachusetts changes the law and gets someone down there to vote. So what the Democrats have to do�not that you don't keep reaching out to Republicans, is to put together a bill that has solid Democratic support, and then you use the 60 votes to close out debate.
But there is going to be some very hard work to do among Senate Democrats. Kennedy certainly would have been the glue to hold them together and get this thing passed. Now, other people will have to step up to try to do it.
Finally, a rail plan for New England
By Michael S. Dukakis and Robert B. O'Brien
Op Ed in The Boston Globe | August 23, 2009
ALL ABOARD! The New England Rail Train is at long last leaving the station.
Earlier this month top transportation officials of the six New England states endorsed an ambitious regional rail plan that will give New England the opportunity to compete for federal stimulus funds as well as the $8 billion the president and Congress already have committed to intercity high speed rail.
The plan includes a series of projects that will connect the region's states to one another and the region to the rest of the country. It will put thousands of people to work, revive some key urban communities, and build a more secure foundation for the region's economic and environmental future.
The projects include:
- New Inland Route high speed service from Boston to New York City via Worcester, Springfield, Hartford, and New Haven, which will link and revitalize some of the region's oldest cities and most affordable and promising economic enterprise zones - as will proposed new rail service to Fall River and New Bedford. The Inland Route will also provide connecting service along a new Knowledge Corridor from Springfield north to Montpelier, Burlington, and Montreal, connecting the five-college area in and around Amherst with universities such as Dartmouth and the University of Vermont. This would encourage the kind of academic and technological excellence that is the key to New England�s future.
- New Capital Corridor service between Concord and Boston - via Manchester, Nashua, and Lowell - which will strengthen another important group of residential and employment centers and ease the burden on a seriously overcrowded I-93 and highway system north of Boston.
- Extension north along the Maine Coast to Freeport and Brunswick of the already successful Amtrak Downeaster service between Boston and Portland, with connections to the Maine State Ferry Service. This will support the all-season tourism industry that has long been a major element of the regional economy and quality of life.
- Completion of environmental review and preliminary engineering for the North Station/South Station Rail Link - for which federal funds have already been requested by Governor Patrick. This project would link North and South Stations by an underground rail tunnel, thereby extending the Amtrak Northeast Rail Corridor north of Boston and finally connecting all the pieces of the commuter rail system in a way that will make it possible for people to leave their cars at home and get to Logan Airport.
The regional rail plan came none too soon. The region is already behind the Midwest and California, both of which have been working on regional rail plans for at least the past decade; other parts of the country are racing to catch up. New England is even behind the rest of the Northeast Corridor, where our partner states to the south have been hard at work, with new rail tunnels between New York and New Jersey already approved, along with roadbed improvements between New York and Washington that will reduce Acela running times to about two hours.
But now that there is a rail plan for New England, it is time to act. The Obama administration has already received over $100 billion in state applications for the $8 billion on the table. The New England governors working our congressional delegations need to push - and push hard - to join California and the Midwest at the front of the federal line. And Massachusetts has a special role to play in this effort: We are the biggest state in New England, and virtually every element of the new regional rail plan is connected to or through us.
Working together, we have a not-to-be-missed opportunity to set the stage for a vibrant and expanding New England economy of the future.
Former governor Michael S. Dukakis is a professor of political science at Northeastern University and former vice chairman of the Amtrak board of directors. Robert B. O'Brien is executive director of the Downtown North Association and chairman of the North-South Rail Link Citizens Advisory Committee.
Comments / DiscussionSource: The Boston Globe.
See related article on the New England Rail Plan.
Measuring for Success
August 18th, 2009, news@Northeastern
Jason Kornwitz
A unique after-school program at Our Space Our Place--a small nonprofit organization housed at the Tobin Community Center, in Roxbury, Massachusetts--is helping visually impaired and blind children gain more self-confidence and build lifelong skills.
And Northeastern students are making sure the youngsters get the most out of their experience there.
Over the spring semester, two students taking "Techniques in Program Evaluation," a graduate-level political science course taught by Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy senior research associate Laurie Dopkins, worked with the resource-strapped nonprofit to develop a way to gather data on student participation, measure the program's effect on students' lives and assess the organization's future goals.
The project was part of the university's Stony Brook Initiative, a large ongoing partnership that links Northeastern with community and nonprofit organizations in neighboring Roxbury, Mission Hill, the Fenway and the South End. The goal of this particular project is to help these nonprofits develop new methods, leverage resources, and become more efficient and effective, despite all the funding cuts prompted by the economic downturn.
"It sounds easy," says Cheryl Cumings, founder and executive director of Our Space Our Place. "But you really need to do research to make sure you have the right tools. We just don't have the time to do the additional work. And, because of our size and limited budget, we cannot afford to pay someone to do the work Northeastern did."
Our Space Our Place, founded in 2005 and currently serving 11 students, aims to introduce visually impaired or blind kids to new worlds of possibility and adventure. From September through June, the 6- to 18-year-olds take lessons in dance and Tai Kwon Do, learn to play chess, write and perform in plays, engage in team sports, host radio shows and participate in college and career exploration.
Meg Bossong, MS'09, who earned her degree in the Law, Policy and Society program, and Diana Wogan, a graduate student studying political science, developed surveys for Our Space Our Place that elicit feedback from students, instructors and parents, and created a spreadsheet-like tool for tracking student participation.
Keeping the reality of budget restrictions and the need for ease of use in mind, Bossong and Wogan also suggested that all students keep a portfolio of their work, so that, at the end of the year, the nonprofit will have a tangible way of measuring student accomplishments.
Having easy-to-access data will come in handy when the nonprofit applies for grants, says Bossong. "It is critical to establish why a program is unique and valuable, and be able to effectively communicate that information to funders, potential volunteers and others interested in the program," she explains.
"Now, when we apply for grants, we will be able to provide numbers, in addition to the great stories we can tell," Cumings adds.
According to Dopkins, the Stony Brook partnership is a much-needed forum for open discussions about the community's needs.
"Together, we're coming up with ways of addressing the issues," she says.
Photo caption: Graduate student Diana Wogan, left, and recent master's degree graduate Meg Bossong developed an evaluation plan for measuring the affect of a program for the visually impaired. Photo by Lauren McFalls.
A Future for Public Employee Unions?
July 18th, 2009, The Boston Globe
Barry Bluestone
While working my way through college in the 1960s on a Ford assembly line in Michigan, I was a proud member of the UAW. My union had 1.5 million members. Its economic clout helped provide excellent wages and benefits, and it was one of the most respected progressive forces in the nation fighting for universal healthcare, civil rights, and workforce training, and fighting against poverty. Its political clout helped boost the national minimum wage, legislation not directly benefiting its own well-paid members.
Today, the UAW has fewer than 465,000 members and its economic and political power is greatly diminished. Much of its decline is due to extraordinary blunders made by the auto companies that employ its members. Nonetheless, over the past two decades, the union often failed to take action to preserve the industry and therefore its own membership.
It failed to press the auto companies to build high-quality, innovative cars that could compete with imports. Often, it insisted on job classifications and work rules that undermined efficiency and compromised the industry's competitiveness.
The UAW was not alone. Today, less than 14 percent of US workers are members of unions, down from 35 percent in 1955. With membership so low, private-sector unions have lost much of their power and the nation is losing a major force for progressive change.
Will public-sector unions follow the same path? Nationwide, these unions represent over 35 percent of federal, state, and local employees, roughly the same as in 1980. Over the years, they have won improved wages and benefits for their members. Yet the leaders of many of these unions, particularly in Massachusetts, seem to be setting the stage for the same kind of deterioration we see in unions like the UAW.
Teachers unions refuse to make changes in work practices that could help improve the chances of children succeeding in school. Police unions fight against lowering the cost of details at construction sites. The MBTA union and others representing transport workers lobby vociferously against reforming the state�s transportation system. Municipal unions refuse to permit their local communities to join the Group Insurance Commission that would save their towns millions without compromising the quality of their members� medical care.
As a result, between 2000 and 2008, the price of state and local public services has increased by 41 percent nationally compared with 27 percent in private services. Even in the face of the worst fiscal crisis in decades, many state and local union leaders refuse to consider a wage freeze that could help preserve more of their members� jobs.
Such action is rapidly losing the support public-sector unions need to survive. Union leaders may think that by working diligently to elect friendly public officials, they can fend off the day of reckoning. But that day is fast approaching. Citizens, and ultimately their elected representatives, will increasingly object to tax increases to pay for what they see as bloated union contracts and poor public service.
Sensing the public's demand for reform, Governor Patrick and the Legislature have already passed pension and transportation measures opposed by union leaders, and Mayor Menino and Governor Patrick favor an expansion in the number of charter schools.
Ultimately, new ways will be found to provide public services to circumvent public unions. Non-union charter schools will proliferate, not to reduce teachers' salaries or benefits but to avoid a plethora of work rules that make school reform difficult. Public services will be privatized with private contractors hired to pick up trash (in addition to recycling), to guard prisoners, and perhaps even to fight fires. Public highways may be sold off. The result: public-sector unions will see their memberships and their influence decline.
This will be a tragedy. To move in a different direction, we need to think about a new "grand bargain" between public-sector unions and government. Union leaders in the state need to consider ways to work collaboratively with public officials so as to offer quality public services at a reasonable cost to the taxpayer while preserving union jobs for their members.
Comments / DiscussionSource: The Boston Globe.
Dukakis Center staff present to Chinese delegation
June 15th, 2009
On June 4th, On June 4th, Dukakis Center Associate Director Stephanie Pollack presented key data on Massachusetts transit and fiscal policy as part of the week-long symposium with government officials from Hangzhou, China.
World Class Cities Partnership hosted the Chinese delegation as the first program of the new initiative. As a new institute of the School of Social Science, Urban Affairs and Public Policy, the World Class Cities Partnership is an international network of government, academic and corporate leaders that aims to bring leaders from around the world together to share resources, information and “best practices” that can be duplicated in other developing cities.
With important city-planning insight from Lisa Signori, Director of Boston's Office of Administration and Finance and Dukakis Center Director Barry Bluestone, the panel discussed the historical strengths and future challenges facing infrastructure planning in Massachusetts. During her portion of the presentation, Associate Director Stephanie Pollack gave a detailed overview of the history of American infrastructure spending and the implications of Massachusetts’s unique budget system on Massachusetts’ transit and public services. Although Massachusetts has made significant steps to expand and “green” metropolitan areas transit systems and public resources, Pollack’s presentation pointed to a need for better collaboration between federal and local governments in the region.
Ms. Signiori's presentation gave key perspective into the City of Boston's budget approval and negotiation process; while highlighting the strengths of a strong mayoral government system, Ms. Signiori explained that Massachusetts often faces budgetary and fiscal negotiation challenges not often seen in other states. Closing with frank questions about differences between state and national infrastructure processes by the Hangzhou delegation, the panel re-emphasized the need for a more diversified source of income for cities and continued transparency between city government officials and unions in order to provide more affordable services for all citizens.
To learn more about the World Class Cities Partnerships, contact Executive Director Michael Lake at m.lake@neu.edu.
Pollack Hangzhou Delegation Presentation
City of Boston FY10 Budget Presentation - April 8th, 2009
City of Boston FY10 Mayors Recommended Budget Summary
Q&A with Barry Bluestone on the many projects of his "think and do tank"
June 1st, 2009
In a recent interview with Northeastern University reporter Susan Salk, Dukakis Center Director Barry Bluestone sounds off on research and policy trends at the Dukakis Center.
Transnational collaboration: School welcomes Chinese delegation for "best practices" symposium
June 1st, 2009
The World Class Cities Partnership, an initiative within the School of Social Science, Urban Affairs and Public Policy proudly welcomes a delegation of government officials from Hangzhou, China from May 31st through June 5th. This week-long symposium will focus on the history and current state of urban issues facing Boston.A collection of experts will discuss a new issue each day, including urban planning, education, technology industries, capital investment and budget, and economic development. This first of it's kind World Class Cities Partnership program will share best practices related to our common urban issues and help resolve these issues in cities around the world.
Source: The School of Social Sciences, Urban Affairs and Public Policy
Dukakis Center Staff Interview Series: Senior Research Associate Laurie Dopkins (Part I)
Meet Laurie Dopkins, the newest Senior Research Associate and Director for the School of Social Sciences, Urban Affairs and Public Policy's Master's in Urban and Regional Policy.