The Phoenix Network:
 
 
About  |  Advertise
Adult  |  Moonsigns  |  Band Guide  |  Blogs  |  In Pictures
 

Is There A Walz-Michelwitz Scandal?

Yesterday -- a week before the special-election primary -- the South End News ran a story alleging that state rep. Marty Walz "may have shared questions prepared for a 3rd Suffolk District candidate debate with candidate Aaron Michlewitz in advance of" a recent candidates debate. So, is this a scandal? Should it be?

Here's what happened, as best as I can tell from people I spoke with, including Robert Whitney, who chairs the Ward 5 Democratic Commitee that co-hosted the debate -- and who moderated the debate. (Walz did not return my call on this.)

Whitney, as is his usual routine, wrote up a list of potential questions a couple of days before the April 21 debate, and circulated the list among at least six or seven people for suggestions. That included the executive board of the committee, which includes Walz; it also included at least one person from Ward 4, and others. Several of them sent back suggestions, which resulted in Whitney creating a new list of 12 questions, which he also sent around.

Apparently, Walz -- who is openly and aggressively supporting Michelwitz -- forwarded both emails, with the questions, to Michelwitz. And, apparently, somebody managed to leak that to The South End News.

Whitney does not feel that anything horrendous occurred here, and that the South End News made too much of it. He says that the list of questions was not exactly a state secret; that having the list was no great advantage, because the questions were all pretty generic, predictable topics; that it's no secret or surprise that members of the Ward Committee are often supporting one or another candidate, and nobody has ever suggested that anyone be kept out of the loop about debates because of that; and that the list Michelwitz allegedly received was not final anyway, and changed right up to the day of the debate.

Walz did not speak to the South End News about it. Michelwitz, queried by the News, did not deny (or explicitly confirm) receiving the lists, instead issuing a statement complaining about the leaking of the emails:

" Whether candidates review questions in advance of forums is really not the issue here - this is about my privacy and an attempt by someone to take the focus off of the issues - which is hardly the politics of change."

So, my take on all this?

1) It's a legitimate story that Walz sent the list to Michelwitz. I don't doubt at all that this kind of thing (and worse) happens all the time, but I think many people would be surprised to find out that it does, and that makes it newsworthy.

2) It doesn't seem as though Michelwitz himself necessarily did anything wrong; all we know is that a supporter sent him some quasi-inside info. Also, I don't think it gave Michelwitz any actual advantage.

3) I think it looks bad for Michelwitz, precisely because he is portrayed, fairly or not, as the machine candidate, for whom the people in power are pulling levers to get him elected. And this looks like one of those people got caught in the act doing exactly that.

4) I also think that Michelwitz's response looks bad. The leak of the emails to South End News is an issue, but that doesn't mean the forwarding of the emails to Michelwitz is not an issue.

5) I think that Walz, Whitney, and many other political activists around the city -- and by the way I like both Walz and Whitney -- are so accustomed to how things actually work in this city, that they don't realize how it all may look from the outside. I mean, of course ward committee members, among others, try to tilt things to their candidates' advantage, in a million and one ways, all the time. The lesson to be learned here, I think, is that perhaps ward committees need to have some discussion about what is and is not acceptable behavior when the committee is playing a role in an election where they wish to be seen as fair and impartial.

Please, give me your own thoughts!

  • Share:
  • Share this entry with Facebook
  • Share this entry with Digg
  • Share this entry with Delicious
  • Email this article to a friend
  • Print this article

11 Comments

  • Actually said:

    Now, I'm not an operative for either campaign, and I live outside of the district so I really don't care who wins. That said, I've been at events with both candidates and it's clear to me that Susan Passoni has a better handle on the issues, ergo some folks feel she's a better candidate. Though Michelwitz ought to know all of these answers, I don't think it's a big secret that he's not as polished of a speaker and is less thoughtful on the issues than Passoni is. So what does having the questions do for Aaron in advance? It closes a gap, a big gap, and one that's perceived to be his biggest weakness. I also wonder what other members of the Ward 5 committee think about this. Not to mention that nobody has confirmed that A) Susan Passoni didn't get the questions form anyone in advance and B) That Walz did anything totally unethical according to anything agreed upon by the ward committees.

    May 13, 2009 7:16 PM
  • Farnkoff said:

    Yes- to the uninitiated it looks like cheating and corruption.

    May 13, 2009 7:23 PM
  • Boston Progressive said:

    Inside baseball. The real issue is that Susan Passoni has all the credentials in the world that any rational person would hope for in a difficult time and yet the institutional support (and in a low turnout election, the electoral support) will go to a fairly unqualified person. Have you seen how the operatives in the North End empty out the elderly on election day. That machine will be at work while the part-time citizen/progressives in the rest of the district will be too busy to bother.

    May 13, 2009 7:46 PM
  • Tony Schinella said:

    What? Ward 5 Democratic operatives rigging a political forum? Surely you jest? Seriously, I can tell you some horror stories about Boston's Ward Committees ...

    That said, this is a legit story. It's embarrassing that the Ward 5 people are just shrugging it off. But this goes to point on why elected officials shouldn't even be involved in any of this stuff.

    May 13, 2009 8:26 PM
  • Ryan said:

    Is having the list of questions truly an earth-shattering advantage? No, but it *is* an advantage - and not a small one. Passoni is viewed (justifiably) as the policy wonk, giving her a natural advantage in such a situation. Aaron himself is pretty good in that capacity too - I had both on my podcast (www.leftahead.com) and both performed admirably, but you can tell that Passoni has a slightly better handle on policy details. So having that list helps.

    That said, I agree with what you said: I don't *blame* Aaron at all for taking the list. There are really two parties at fault here: 1) Waltz and 2) the committee for keeping the questions secret to begin with. In about half (or more) of state rep races -- and I'm speaking from experience here -- candidates are given a list of potential questions in which to prepare from. That levels the playing field and ensures that none of this behind the scenes cheating goes on. That should have happened here.

    The only reason why Aaron deserves any blame here is for lying about it (giving a non-answer is lying, as far as I'm concerned). Trying to flip this just does NOT fly. If he had just explained what had happened and apologized, this issue wouldn't have mattered on election day -- it wouldn't have turned any voters. The fact that he didn't probably won't crush his campaign, but it's probably going to be a close race. So if he loses by 2-3%, despite all his tremendous advantages, this may help explain.

    May 13, 2009 10:05 PM
  • Observer said:

    "Lying", "Cheating", "Apologize"?  Seems a little judgmental to me.  I didn't read his response as dishonest or a lie; having been provided questions that may be asked in advance of a forum (yes - these are forums not debates) is not cheating; and for what does he need to apologize for? Making sure he was prepared? Do we even know if Susan Passoni got a copy of the questions? No. Rob Whitney, the Ward 5 Chair, seems to be a voice of reason here.  He doesn't "feel that anything horrendous occurred here, and that the South End News made too much of it. He says that the list of questions was not exactly a state secret; that having the list was no great advantage." So why should we care? For me, it is not about what someone told the candidates, its about what the candidates tell us. Seems Susan Passoni may have been telling us something different than what she has been telling others. www.mysouthend.com/index.php  

    May 14, 2009 12:16 AM
  • Boston Bertie said:

    The hacks are coming...the hacks are coming...

    May 14, 2009 12:40 AM
  • Rob said:

    I don't have a dog in this race and don't live in the district first off. Michlewitz has been around the State House and active in his neighborhood so he is not the inexperienced rookie that some commenters here are suggesting. That's a pretty standard background for a state rep candidate. Passoni's disadvantage is not the machine backing Michlewitz, which clearly is happening. Passoni's problem is she is again running for a seat that has its power base outside the South End. She did the same thing against Jim Kelly. That's not necessarily her fault, but lines are often drawn on the neighborhood loyalties, and her area provides less troops for her in that regard.

    May 14, 2009 10:35 PM
  • boatbabe said:

    Leaking the questions is wrong, even if common in ward politics. And the Boston Globe has fallen right in step with ward handlers by endorsing Michelwitz.  The Globe ought to retract its endorsement, and let Michelwitz prove himself, if he can.  

    May 17, 2009 2:06 PM
  • BostonVoiceOf Reason said:

    Hmmm, Aaron Michlewitz's former boss was a crook who had no trouble disregarding what was legal and moral, and now his newly-elected successor is now up to similar tricks.  Really disappointing that the people in Boston put up with such crap again and again.  Look at all the people who kept supporting Diane Wilkerson despite her repeated abuses of power.  

    May 19, 2009 11:15 PM
  • Hmmmm? said:

    Not so fast on Michlewitz, BostonVoiceofReason. You instruct us to look at all the people who kept supporting Diane Wilkerson despite her repeated abuses of power.  I did.  Couldn't find Aaron's name on her campaign finance report but I did see Susan Passoni's ($100 check on 11/22/07). What do you make of that?

    May 23, 2009 12:19 PM

Leave a Comment

Login | Not a member yet? Click here to Join
Follow the Boston Phoenix
twitter facebook myspace youtube rss
All Blogs
more by David S. Bernstein
Ladies' man | November 20, 2009
Has Obama peaked? No, he hasn't | November 13, 2009
The Quiet Storm | November 06, 2009
Taking sides | October 30, 2009
Holding his punches | October 23, 2009

 See all articles by: David S. Bernstein

ADVERTISEMENT
Latest Comments
Is your doctor a greedy scumbag, or just a good Massachusetts liberal? - Suppressed Medical Records (File 5100-13465/001) St. Catharines, Ontario - Privacy Commissioner of Canada...

By mar on 11-20-2009 in Phlog

Tisei, Gay, By The Way - With this, it seems that Tisei is indeed the chosen one for LG. There is already a great Democratic candidate...

By Boston Bertie on 11-20-2009 in Talking Politics

DJ Hero: Enter to Win a Free Copy! - please please my mom cant by it so i was just wondering if you could if you can thanks a big

By james on 11-19-2009 in Laser Orgy

VIDEO OF THE WEEK: exclusive Cave In DVD preview - Good thing there's been screaming in their music long before their "last couple recordings."...

By Zach on 11-19-2009 in On The Download

VIDEO OF THE WEEK: exclusive Cave In DVD preview - I'm happy that one of the bands that got me into hardcore and alternative music is still playing and...

By Gabriel on 11-19-2009 in On The Download

Latest Comments from Talking Politics
Most Viewed
Unbelievably Exclusive Interviews with Edan and Ricky Powell
HOMEWORK: Assignment #2: D-Tension
REVIEW: Dominique Eade Quartet + Lake Street Dive at Scullers on October 21
Juliana Hatfield announces new album, sings about Evan Dando, appoints a new Phoenix music editor
Rock & Shock 2009: Misfits + Type O Negative at the Palladium
Photos: YouTube goes "U2ube" for its first-ever live concert broadcast #u2webcast
The pains of being The Pains of Being Pure at Heart
Most Viewed from Talking Politics
Search Blogs
 
Talking Politics Archives
Saturday, November 21, 2009  |  Sign In  |  Register
 
TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
thePhoenix.com
Phoenix Media/Communications Group
Copyright © 2009 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group