Candidates for state representative in the 13th Norfolk District traded charges in heated exchanges last night during the third and final debate in the campaign to replace state Rep. Lida Harkins.
Democrat Denise Garlick fended off accusations from John O’Leary, the Republican candidate, that Garlick enjoys the support of special interests groups. He claims her ties to these groups would prevent meaningful change at the Statehouse.
Garlick, meanwhile, asked O’Leary to explain why he would not support local aid for seniors and other social services and why he denounced hard-working unions.
Both candidates are from Needham and are running to take the place of Harkins, who is leaving the Legislature after 22 years. The election is next Tuesday. The district includes Needham, Dover and parts of Medfield. Harkins was in the audience of about 100 people at the debate, which was hosted by the League of Women Voters of Needham at the Broadmeadow Elementary School in Needham.
In the debate, both candidates agreed that most voters have lost trust public officials and change is necessary to fix the state’s economy.
"The air is full of criticism.” said Garlick, a Needham selectwomen, in her opening statement. She asserted, however, that she will make independent decisions that are best for her constituents.
But O'Leary questioned whether Garlick could act independently. “My opponent Mrs. Garlick is a wonderful person who has done a lot for the town,” said O’Leary in his opening statement. But he said that Garlick, "shares the same philosophy that has governed our state'' in recent years.
O’Leary, a researcher at Harvard University, said he is very concerned about the budget shortfall for next year, and he would take legislators off the pension system, repeal a law that prevents state offices from outsourcing more efficient services and reform the civil service system.
“Unions oppose those reforms, and those organizations endorsed Denise,” said O’Leary. “Unions act in own best interests.”
Garlick, a nurse at Wellesely College, responded that she was proud to have endorsements from teachers and nurses unions, as well as endorsements from nonunion workers.
“I’m working hard to represent people who have no jobs at all,” she said. “You can’t say jobs are important but disparage workers who do that work.”
Two years after the presidential debates made “Joe the plumber” famous, the sparring over unions and government workers by O'Leary and Garliock came down to a nameless unionized janitor. O’Leary said while he was working at a government agency, a janitor had a two-day hearing for a three-day suspension. He called the process “ridiculous.”
Garlick said anyone facing suspension should have a fair hearing, but O’Leary said the union grievances available to the janitor were sufficient and a long hearing was wasteful.
Moving on to healthcare cost containment, both candidates admitted the problem was too complicated for anyone to know the right solution. Garlick, however, said direct care providers had to be part of the conversation. She said she would make sure 90 percent of funds go to direct care if a provider raised rates, and she would protect local hospitals.
O’Leary said he would remove municipal healthcare plans from collective bargaining, make prices transparent and separate insurance from employment.
The candidates were much less in agreement on topics related to education. For example, O’Leary supports charter schools in communities that need them, while Garlick thinks they are a drain on the public school system.
O’Leary expressed concern with the newly adopted national education standards, which he thinks are too low, while Garlick said the national standards were based on those proven successful in Massachusetts.
O’Leary, who is a member of the Needham School Committee, said Needham schools decided to forgo its share of federal education funds because the paperwork was too expensive.
“This is a pattern with federal government,” said O’Leary. “Massachusetts had a pretty good thing going with its [education] reform, and now it’s at risk.”
Garlick said federal education funds would stabilize school budgets and help close the achievement gap.
“I’m shocked we would forgo $40,000 because there was too much paperwork,” said Garlick. “Every dollar counts.”
Before the forum closed, the candidates came back to a discussion on aid and social services. In response to a question asking what the candidates would do for seniors, O’Leary said government is spending and providing more services than it can afford.
“We don’t have the resources to play Santa Claus anymore,” he said. “This isn’t something like, this mean Republican guy doesn’t want to give nice things to people. There’s no money there, people.”
Garlick requested a rebuttal, arguing that social services are funded by tax dollars and citizens decide how to spend that money.
“The money we spend on children in our system on education and human services, individuals with disabilities and seniors are not gifts from Santa Claus,” she said. “We decide where we’re going to cut.”
No comments:
Post a Comment