Tracking the Real Plans Offered During the Mass. Gubernatorial Debate
The gubernatorial candidates will clash again Tuesday night in a second televised debate. And by “clash,’’ we mean sit in a room and try to say as little as possible about their actual plans for the state.
That’s what they did during the first debate, anyway. You know there wasn’t a ton of substance since we were able to live-tweeted the exchange using only emoji. Frankly, it was the perfect medium for the fluff the candidates spat out during the hour-long cure for insomnia.
For the Oct. 7 debate, which airs on WBZ, we have some hope that at least one of the five will say something — anything — that resembles an actual, concrete plan of action to address an issue facing Massachusetts. We can count on host Jon Keller to showcase his ability to demand answers. At least, we hope so. And we’re hoping he lives up to that reputation.
If you’re counting, that’s two things we’re hoping for.
Follow this post for statements of substance made by the candidates. We’ll ignore the fluff.
Definitions: Fluff is saying “I support expanding T service,’’ or “I support innovation.’’ Substance is saying “I support expanding T service to Allston and pledge to open the proposed West Station by the end of my first term.’’ That way, you’ll have a short, easy-to-digest list of actual promises and ideas, rather than more blather about “common sense’’ this and “broad support’’ that.
We’re not the only ones who should make this call. If you catch a candidate in a moment of substance, tweet about it as add @BostonDotCom to your message. If we see it and agree, we’ll add it to our list.
Halfway through the debate, we’ve heard precious few tangible proposals from the candidates.
Independent Scott Lively said he would shut down the troubled Department of Children and Families, citing the bungled case of Justina Pelletier as an example of why the agency can’t be saved.
Independent Jeff McCormick has a few specific proposals around tax policy, including rolling back the state income tax to 5 percent “through attrition,’’ doubling the historic tax credit, and eliminating the inventory tax for businesses.
The second half of the debate offered fewer concrete plans. Independent candidate Evan Falchuk said he would implement a “fee schedule’’ to control healthcare costs in the state, similar to the price control scheme used in Maryland.
Democrat Martha Coakley and Republican Charlie Baker stayed away from specifics during the hour-long debate, opting instead to talk about direction and tone for their future administrations. Baker did talk about the debate devolving into a “cocoon of horror.’’ if that sounds familiar, it’s because the term was used by local boxer Peter McNeeley way back in the 1990’s. The Medfield fighter uttered the legendary phrase during a pre-fight interview with Mike Tyson.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com