return to EEA in the News

As budget debates grind on, Finneran looks to the future

Steve LeBlanc
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Sunday, May 9, 2004

BOSTON- During eight years as one of Beacon Hill's top power brokers, House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, D-Boston, has survived attempted political coups, outlasted three Republican governors and navigated his way through a dizzying drop in state revenues.

It's no surprise he may be thinking about his legacy.

Last month, Finneran unveiled what could be one of the pillars of his Statehouse tenure - a program that may someday provide free preschool education to all Massachusetts children.

By his own account, it is one of his most cherished goals.

For years, Finneran has spoken about the importance of early childhood education and the need for the state to expand learning opportunities for its youngest citizens - although any attempt to launch such a sweeping program sooner was stymied when the economy collapsed.

In a January speech to fellow lawmakers and the public, Finneran, with one eye on the future, again extolled the virtues of such a program.

"By the year 2010 we can be well advanced in an early childhood education policy that matches in scope and ambition the effort we made in 1993 on education reform," he said. "I believe this choice is the right choice for our future, and I ask you to join me in the effort to advance it."

Finneran has said he isn't convinced the good times are back, but he went ahead and sponsored an amendment to the House budget - which his fellow House members quickly approved last week - to lay the groundwork for the proposal.

Even lawmakers who have at times sparred with Finneran say any politician would love to have a major education initiative on his or her list of legislative achievements.

"Anyone would be proud of having a legacy of instituting early childhood education for every Massachusetts child," said state Rep. David P. Linsky, D-Natick, who has occasionally found himself at odds with Finneran.

Finneran also is pushing what could be another pillar of his legacy, an amendment to the state constitution that will force lawmakers to stash away money during boom times.

The proposed amendment comes from Finneran's belief that one of the top reasons the recent fiscal crunch wasn't much worse was the fact that during the boom years of the 1990s, lawmakers poured money into a rainy day fund.

That fund was tapped during the past few years to prevent even deeper cuts as new revenues plummeted.

Finneran wants to change the constitution to require that a certain amount of tax revenues automatically be funneled into the rainy day fund during future booms.

What others might see as an arcane fiscal mechanism is almost as near and dear to Finneran's heart as his early childhood education program.

For Finneran, the rainy day fund is not just an example of fiscal restraint but a deep point of pride. He repeatedly has praised his fellow House lawmakers for resisting the urge to spend more or make deeper tax cuts during the 1990s.

What most threatens any Finneran legacy - besides what his critics say is his tight control over the House - is an investigation into whether Finneran was completely forthcoming about his role in drafting a district map for 17 Boston House seats.

In February, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that lawmakers sacrificed "racial fairness" to protect incumbents during the redistricting of 17 Boston House districts and questioned what it said was Finneran's denial of any role in the process.

Critics of Finneran have used the court's comments to call for a perjury investigation.

Finneran has taken the threat seriously, hiring a high-powered criminal defense lawyer to help stamp out the furor.

Only history can tell which image of Finneran will ultimately prevail - Finneran the childhood-education advocate and sage fiscal watchdog, or Finneran the autocratic legislative leader.

In that same January speech, Finneran - again with one eye on the future - evoked the image of a small girl and her parents and said lawmakers have a responsibility to help improve their lives as much as possible.

"Our decisions will, for better or worse, affect that baby, her parents, and her peers," he said. "It is for them that we must continue to get these big decisions right."

return to top of page