Charlie Baker’s decision about whether to seek an unprecedented third consecutive four-year term in the Corner Office is a lot more interesting and consequential than most people realize. If you really want to know whether Baker will run and whether he would win if he does run, pay attention to the words and deeds of Beacon Hill Democrats not the governor’s press clippings and poll numbers.
Most punditry about his re-election decision and prospects highlight Baker’s consistent popularity in the bright blue Commonwealth and his relations with fellow Republicans in the state, including his own Lt. Governor. From a polling and a plausible campaign narrative standpoint, there is no reason to doubt that Baker would be a formidable candidate for re-election. There is nothing insurmountable about the recent bumps in the public relations road for Baker if his re-election prospects turn on public relations.
Of course, Baker’s re-election prospects don’t really turn on his ability to maintain his impressive popularity with voters in the state. Re-election to the top job in the Bay State is about power, not popularity, and the overlap between the two is surprisingly slim. The coin of the realm for occupants of the Corner Office is their relationship with leaders in the state legislature. No modern Massachusetts governor succeeds on or after Election Day without the cooperation, or at least acquiescence, of legislative leaders. If Baker were able to win re-election despite genuine opposition from legislative leaders, it would be a pyrrhic victory very likely followed by a legacy destroying final act in his political career.
Baker’s re-election prospects turn on his ability to run without poisoning his working relationship with Democratic leaders on Beacon Hill. His carefully maintained distance from the GOP is helpful. The Trumpification of the MassGOP contributed to his very easy 2018 re-election by making it easier for Beacon Hill Democrats to be (quietly) supportive. Assuming he can get past whatever Trump stooge the MassGOP throws at him in the 2022 primary, it could help again, but the key factor will be whether the Speaker and Senate president and their leadership teams decide to put their weight behind Baker’s Democratic challenger or not.
The past year has definitely challenged legislative leaders’ ability to maintain good working relations with the governor. Progressive activists and special interests have made headway pressuring the legislature to take stronger stands on issues like police reform and public health policy. The very public creation of three new legislative oversight committees in February focused on COVID-19 oversight, emergency management, racial equality, and cybersecurity signaled the increased pressure on legislative leaders from progressive activists. Bay State progressives have also recently stepped up their attacks on the state legislature’s infamous lack of transparency. Massachusetts is the only state in the Union that exempts all three branches of the state government from open meeting laws.
The bottom-line is that the governor’s public profile, poll numbers, and relations with his own political party are only minor factors in his re-election calculations and prospects. The ability of legislative leaders to maintain their control of the policy agenda and to protect the political prospects of their members are not seriously threatened by Baker’s popularity, but might be if progressive pressure forces Beacon Hill Democratic leaders off the sidelines in the 2022 gubernatorial election.
The thing is having Baker in the corner office in some ways gives the leadership of the legislature to cover to not have to along with policies they don’t support but the progressive activists of the party base do. Does having a more progressive governor who the legislature wouldn’t want to listen to anyways help the situation vis a vis the legislative leadership vs the progressive base? I don’t know. Obviously the progressive base has collected some scalps lately but they have tended to be for Federal not State office in Massachusetts. Electing a Trump supporting Democrat to Bob DeLeo’s old seat can only be viewed for example as a complete humiliation of the progressive wing of the party.
I will throw out a few more ideas for progressives to shake things up.
1. Call for Western MA to be a separate state or become part of Vermont. I personally think a lot of the progressive activism you see in places like Northampton is in part based on frustration and alienation with Beacon Hill. I am not saying it is entirely based on this or that there is not progressive activism in the Eastern part of the state too but from reading people like yourself Jerrold and Bill Scher of Northampton as an Eastern MA resident(of Andover) I can’t help but think there is a lot of resentment in the West towards the East right now.
2. Go nuclear and nominate Elizabeth Warren for governor against Baker. If you truly want to get rid of Baker, Elizabeth Warren is obviously a candidate that could unite and enthuse the progressive base like no one else can(I might put Rachel Maddow, her wife Susan, and Ayanna Pressley also in this grouping though with Pressley having less recognition than Warren). Obviously this is a high risk and high reward idea(Although Warren isn’t up for reelection to the US Senate until 2024 anyways). If Baker were to beat Warren it would have national implications for the nationwide progressive movement and Baker would face pretty good odds even against Warren.
Something else I will point out is back during the 1990 Silber-Weld race much of the leadership of the legislature did support John Silber such as Billy Bulger but that did not stop Weld from winning the general election. Of course this was a far different time and Silber was a far different candidate than what today’s Democrats would support but a parallel is that a Warren candidacy would essentially force all elected Dems into the race against Baker on behalf of Warren but on the other hand Baker could still very well win an embarrassing the entire party apparatus and progressive movement.