Fully parsing Bonifaz’s critique of Galvin, and Galvin’s response to it, would require more space than we have here. Ultimately, however, their sparring probably won’t determine the course of this particular campaign. The contours of the race already seem clear — and they hint at an abiding internal divide in the Massachusetts Democratic Party.
For his part, Bonifaz is a bona fide lefty, an activist who’d surely use the secretary’s job as a vehicle for his activism if elected. (As head of the NVRI, Bonifaz is currently representing David Cobb and Michael Badnarik — the Green and Libertarian presidential candidates from 2004, respectively — in a lawsuit seeking a full recount of presidential ballots cast in Ohio two years ago.) Galvin, as already mentioned, is an archetypal Beacon Hill insider. And despite his decidedly populist stance on economic issues, other conservative leanings — most notably, his opposition to abortion — often lead him to be classed as a centrist.
The insurgent-versus-insider narrative is well established here in Massachusetts. Here’s how the story line goes: the insurgents — think Robert Reich in the 2002 gubernatorial campaign or Deval Patrick in this year’s governor’s race — generate plenty of buzz in the early going, as their energy and left-of-center views fire up the Democratic base. As the campaign progresses, however, they begin to struggle, hampered by inferior campaign organizations and fundraising difficulties. Then, by the time the primary rolls around, they’re essentially out of the game.
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.
For the purposes of Bonifaz’s candidacy, it doesn’t matter that Clean Elections ultimately failed. (While the SJC found in Tolman’s favor, the Democratic legislature simply continued refusing to fund the law.) In fact, it could be a good thing. After all, there’s a clear perception, among voters from all ends of the political spectrum, that Beacon Hill insiders have a habit of blithely dismissing the will of the public. If Bonifaz can use his Clean Elections background to sell himself as champion of Massachusetts voters — while simultaneously painting Galvin as a creature of the system — he could make things interesting.
Thus far, however, it’s not clear that Bonifaz has sufficient political acumen to take this step. During the candidates’ night in Pittsfield, he treated his role in the Clean Elections controversy as an afterthought, mentioning it halfway through his speech and rushing on before the crowd could respond. All he wanted, it seemed, was to talk about voting problems. That may be enough to get Democratic die-hards fired up, but the general public is sure to want more. And if Bonifaz doesn’t realize this soon, his campaign could be over before it starts.
___
On the Web:
William Galvin: //www.sec.state.ma.us/
John Bonifaz: //johnbonifaz.com/
National Voting Rights Institute: //nvri.org/
After Downing Street: //afterdowningstreet.org/
Email the author:
Adam Reilly: areilly@thephoenix.com