Making their final case
THE CBS4 gubernatorial debate on Wednesday was our last chance to see the three Democrats head to head -- and this finale mostly belonged to Chris Gabrieli.
Attorney General Tom Reilly, back on his political medication after a hyper-aggressive debate demeanor last week, rebounded with a performance crisp enough to bolster his backers' hopes.
By contrast, the usually unflappable Deval Patrick was occasionally flustered as he tried to fend off two candidates intent on arresting his front-runner's momentum.
I judged Gabrieli the winner for several reasons.
First, as he did in the last debate, the venture capitalist displayed the most nuanced understanding of the state's economy. Second, he managed to highlight some meaningful differences with Patrick. Finally, a candidate often marked by a wonky earnestness showed new forcefulness in driving home his points -- though I could have done without the smug smirk that punctuated some of his ripostes.
On the issue of a tax cut, Gabrieli succeeded in opening some meaningful space for himself between Reilly's call for a one-year income tax cut from 5.3 percent to 5 percent and Patrick's somewhere-over-the-rainbow approach to possible tax cuts. Gabrieli has a thoughtful plan to phase in an affordable tax reduction, and to dismiss it as airy theory, as Reilly and Patrick tried to, doesn't wash.
By contrast, Reilly's repeated insistence that policy makers should reduce the income tax in one fell swoop because voters approved a ballot-question tax cut in 2000 made him seem like an automaTom . Nor does it fit budgetary reality.
``The tax to cut is the property tax," Patrick objected. Fair enough. But until Patrick puts out a proposal to ensure that the higher local aid levels allowed by keeping the income tax at 5.3 percent will translate into property tax relief, and not just more local spending, his call for reducing that levy amounts merely to a consummation devoutly to be wished.
Another issue where Gabrieli scored was charter schools, the independent public schools that operate outside traditional public school governance. Gabrieli has long championed those innovative schools, which Reilly also backs. Patrick purports to favor them as well, but given his various caveats, that supposed support might more aptly be labeled opposition to further charter-school expansion.
That's unfortunate, the more so since a new state-sponsored study has just documented the promise of charters, particularly when it comes to boosting academic performance by minority and low-income students.
Still, it's no surprise: It's awfully hard to make yourself the favorite of the educational establishment and remain independent enough to be a real catalyst for educational change. Gabrieli did an effective job of making that weakness clear. ``You are wrong to refuse these kids the choices" more charters would allow, he said.
When Patrick said he wanted a different financing formula -- his website calls for ``funding mechanisms that do not disadvantage district schools" -- Gabrieli pointed out the district schools receive some funding for students for three years after they have departed for charters, to help those schools adjust.
My big reservation: Gabrieli's attempt to generate traction by opposing in-state tuition for children of illegal immigrants; these are kids we're talking about.
As for Patrick, his most memorable moment was a tinny one: His question to his rivals about what the ``nasty and negative stuff" in this campaign ``says about your character and your leadership."
``Deval, no one's picking on you," rejoined Reilly. ``What do you think is going to happen when the Republicans get a shot at you? This is tame."
Reilly's right. This hasn't been a negative campaign. A political pillow fight is more like it. (Why, the Dukakis of Queensbury Commission to police campaign ad negativity hasn't even issued any demerits. ) Given that reality, Patrick's query exuded a contrived goody-two-shoeism.
Now, Gabrieli will never compete with Patrick in charisma quotient. And his repeated declaration that this race is not about Democratic ideas or Republican ideas but good ideas won't do much for true-blue partisans. But his less partisan approach might appeal to independents who decide general elections.
Yesterday, Kerry Healey demonstrated she's worried about that possibility by launching a pre-primary attack ad, urging voters to ``say no to Chris Gabrieli." Her accusation of financial self-interest is bogus -- but her motive is apparent.
``It's pretty clear . . . that she doesn't want to run against me," Gabrieli said in an afternoon press conference.
Hard to argue with that interpretation.
Scot Lehigh's e-mail address is lehigh@globe.com. 