Bonifaz’s challenge is especially tough. He’s not challenging an insider for an open seat; instead, he’s seeking to unseat an entrenched incumbent with a generally positive public image. He’s also doing so in a relatively low-profile race. Furthermore, Galvin’s financial advantage is almost absurdly large: at the end of 2005, he had over $1.7 million in the bank, compared to Bonifaz’s $19,000. Given these handicaps, it seems that Bonifaz will be fortunate to get past the Democrats’ June convention, where candidates who win the support of 15 percent of delegates advance to the primary.
“The convention, obviously, does give disproportionate support to progressives,” says one left-leaning Democratic insider. “But my sense is, Galvin hasn’t done a lot to annoy progressives. They might be saying there are things he can do better, but I don’t think people are looking to dump him because he’s done a terrible job. John may say, ‘I can do better.’ But is that good enough? Is there a compelling reason to make a change? It’s up to Bonifaz to convince people.”
“Activists, movement people, whatever you want to call them — they’re very good at getting their names in the newspaper, but they’re not necessarily good at working on the ground,” says another Democratic observer. “Getting 15 percent at the convention, that’s 750 or so [delegates]. That’s a lot of people. And Bonifaz knows basically nobody.”
The issues
Still, Bonifaz has assets of his own. He is, obviously, very intelligent and extremely knowledgeable. (So is Galvin, for that matter; in terms of sheer brainpower, this may be the most impressive Democratic primary in recent memory.) “He’s a serious candidate in that he has serious issues,” the first Democrat says of Bonifaz.
He’s also likely to enjoy broad support among gay and lesbian voters, since Galvin was recently named in a suit challenging a proposed ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. Galvin has said he personally opposes such a ban, but certified the signatures gathered for the ballot initiative in question, despite allegations that bait-and-switch tactics had been used to obtain them. In an op-ed recently published in the Globe, Bonifaz claimed that Galvin’s decision jeopardized the integrity of the ballot-initiative process. (Galvin responded, also in the Globe, that even if such tactics were used, more than enough legitimate signatures were obtained to allow the process to move forward.) Attorney General Tom Reilly, who’s running for governor and has earned lasting animosity among the gay and lesbian electorate for his record on gay marriage, is the main subject of the aforementioned lawsuit. But Galvin’s involvement could hurt his cause among Democratic activists.
So could the question of abortion. While Galvin says he’s personally opposed, Bonifaz is an unequivocal supporter of abortion rights. Given Governor Mitt Romney’s recent rightward shift on the issue — and the siege mentality that’s increasingly prevalent among supporters of legalized abortion, especially with the pending Supreme Court confirmation of Samuel Alito — pro-choice Democrats might be unusually attuned to the issue this year. Finally, Bonifaz has an intimate connection with one of the most contentious public-policy issues in recent memory, the voter-approved Clean Elections law that the Massachusetts legislature refused to fund. In 2002, Bonifaz represented gubernatorial candidate Warren Tolman before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court as Tolman attempted to secure Clean Elections financing for his campaign.
