Clean Water Action Massachusetts had a banner year for local elections in 2008. Eighteen of the 20 candidates that we endorsed in the Massachusetts legislature won their races in the Primary on September 17th and the General Election on November 4th.
Clean Water Action endorses candidates for office who we believe will be champions for the environment and Clean Water Action issue goals. We base our endorsements on the candidate's records and endorsement questionnaires. We inform our members about our local endorsements and encourage them to vote for our candidate. For key races, our field teams go door to door in the candidate's district talking with our members about the election and urging them to vote for our endorsed candidates. In this election Clean Water Action reached out to its members and through its federal and state political action committees with the general public.
The most notable victories included:
Middlesex and Worcester Senate District - Jamie Eldridge (D), State Representative from Acton, bested opponent Steven Levy (R), 57% to 43% and will be replacing departing Senator Pamela Resor.
3rd Middlesex House District - Kate Hogan (D) earned 48% of the vote in a 3 way race against Sunny Parente (R - 44%) and David Goulding (U - 9%). Hogan will fill the seat vacated by Representative Patricia Walrath.
37th Middlesex House District - In the race to fill the House seat vacated by Eldridge, Clean Water Action endorsed candidate Jennifer Benson (D) won her race with 56% of the vote. Opponent Kurt Hayes (R) received 44%.
4th Plymouth House District - In the primary, Clean Water Action helped to elect Jim Cantwell (D). Cantwell won a 4-way race with 52% of the vote, a huge margin, making him the Democrats' nominee from that district. He was unopposed in the final election.
Other candidates endorsed by Clean Water Action who were elected or re-elected:
House of Representatives
Senate
Clean Water Action Massachusetts was also proud to be part of a powerful coalition which successfully worked to defeat Question #1 - a reckless and binding proposal to eliminate the state income tax. This would have eliminated at least $12 billion—nearly 40%—from the state budget. Such a cut would have led to draconian cuts in state services. City and towns would have lost state aid, been forced to drastically raise property taxes, and cut services.
Clean Water Action was particularly concerned that the enforcement of laws that protect our air, water, and community health would suffer. Question #1 would have forced drastic cuts in "discretionary" state programs decimating education, infrastructure, public safety, and environmental protection.
We are proud to have teamed up with numerous other environmental, business, labor groups, parents, and faith organizations in opposing Question #1.