Bill Weld Began Decline of the Republican Party

By Evelyn Reilly
April 2001

Sidebars:
Republican State Committee Should be Chosen by Local Caucuses
Weld and Cellucci Pay Off Homosexual Activists

When Bill Weld took over as Governor in 1990, the GOP was struggling.

But it was still alive. A lot of enthusiasm had built during the late 1980s because of Ray Shamie. But that ended when Weld took over.

Weld was angry at conservatives because they had backed his opponent, Steven Pierce, at the state convention and in the ensuing primary. Many Republicans even favored the more conservative Democrat, John Silber, in the general election.

The general election turned out to be an unusual one with many conservatives backing Silber and independents and liberal Democrats voting for Weld.

When Weld eked out a win with the help of liberals, including Natalie Jacobson at Channel 5 and the homosexual activists, he took a scorched earth policy to the conservatives and ruled the state from the left center of the political spectrum.

His successor, Paul Cellucci, has also followed that policy. The entire party is run as an adjunct of the Governor's office. As a result, the party has dwindled to almost a non-entity.

Two Parties Needed

Most people agree that a one-party state is not conducive to good government. Even the Boston Globe editorialized to that point a year ago when it said that the problems in Jack Robinson's campaign for U.S. Senator showed that the Republicans are unable to "generate real competition for Democrats across the full range of political offices." The Globe opined that, "This may please Democrats, but it is not a healthy situation for the long-term interests of the public."

Few are happy with the state GOP.

"The Massachusetts Republican Party is all but dead," wrote Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby after last fall's election. "Unless something changes fast, it will soon be extinct. Expect the funeral in 2002."

But one of its biggest problems is the Globe itself. Aside from the classified and sports sections, that newspaper is a political machine for the extreme liberals. It has huge power to decide what the voters of the state will know and what they will never hear. It slants almost all of its news stories to an extreme feminist, liberal point-of-view.

Their power was evidenced recently when the newspaper began writing glowing stories about Jane Swift, which has resulted in her endorsing the paper's editorial positions.

Last fall, conservatives won the three major state ballot initiatives - tax reduction, rejection of socialized medicine and Question Number 8 which would have gutted drug law enforcement. However, while the Republican Party did support tax reduction, it can take no credit for defeating the socialized medicine or drug questions. Its support for state candidates was nearly invisible and GOP representation at the State House is dropping even further from its already dismal level.

As the Republican Party in Massachusetts limps along with no one in Congress, only six of 40 Senators and 24 of 160 Reps in the State House (and some of that few, including the Republican leader of the House, are leaving for other positions), a period of self-examination is in the works for Republican activists from top to bottom of the organizational and activist chains.

Nathan Woodside, a Boston College graduate student who has studied the state GOP and produced a paper focusing on the Congressional races, reports that Republican candidates in our state raised 34 percent of total fundraising for the congressional races in 1996. In 1998, Republicans candidates saw their share drop to 17 percent. The decline continued into the 2000 race, in which the five Republican congressional candidates struggled to pull 3 percent of total contributions, according to the Federal Elections Commission.

"Financial support for the Massachusetts Republican Party is wilting away at a staggering rate," says Woodside. "But despite claiming only 13 percent of registered voters, the party has managed to put a governor and lieutenant governor in the statehouse."

The "wilting away" of contributions began with the election of Governor Weld in 1990 and continued with Cellucci. However, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, with Cellucci's help, Governor George W. Bush raised $1,803,447 in Massachusetts for his presidential race, almost twice as much as Al Gore!

That is interesting for two reasons. The state is generally and widely assumed to be extremely "liberal" and yet so much was raised in a place where Republicans represent such a small percentage of registered voters. Most of the funds raised in the state went to Bush instead of local candidates.

How Liberal Really is Massachusetts?

While party leadership is socially liberal, the worldview of Massachusetts citizens may be different according to recent surveys.

One survey, conducted very recently by the Tarrance Group on behalf of the Massachusetts Citizens Alliance, revealed that 60-70% of our most likely voters favor restricting marriage to one man and one woman.

Ironically, until recent years the concept of marriage was so foundational that changing its definition would be unthinkable. It was such a basic principle, that marriage has never been specifically defined in state law. Almost every other legal term or aspect of life has a definition in the law. The proposed bill would correct that omission by adding the definition for marriage as being a legal relationship only between one man and one woman. The survey indicates that most voters support the traditional definition and legal status of marriage.

A second survey conducted by Wirthlin in late 1999 on behalf of Massachusetts News indicated that 92% of Massachusetts citizens oppose encouraging teens to be sexually active. Forty-seven percent of the 600 "high-propensity voters" polled said they were liberal, 40% conservative and 9% moderate. The liberals also voted overwhelmingly against encouraging such activity by a 91% margin.

Despite the impression given in the major media that public support for sex education in the schools is widespread, these survey results indicate that most of the public would oppose the kind of sex education currently in many of our public schools - if they knew about it. But the Globe will never tell them. Recent surveys also show that a growing majority of voters believe abortion should be more restricted by law than it currently is.

These surveys, along with the large amount of money raised here for conservative Governor George W. Bush and the regular re-election of a number of Democratic conservatives to the State House, suggest that candidates and the Republican Party need to reassess the canard that you can't win in Massachusetts as a conservative.

Many say that the election of George W. Bush on the national level, after the dismal failure of his father in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996, indicates that if you run away from the social issues you are bound to lose.

Is GOP Supporting Its Candidates?

In the 2000 election, the Republican Party gave no support to federal candidates, other than George Bush and Peter Abair (who ran for Congress against John Olver). In questioning the criteria for support from the Republican State Committee, one of the candidates for Congress, Eric Bleicken, told Massachusetts News that, "Party leaders seem embarrassed by people who use words like "Constitution" and "pro-life."

He says that it's impossible to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

"It comes apart," he says. "It's not logical. Liberal policies require government control and intervention and involvement in our daily lives, which is the opposite of what our Founding Fathers envisioned.

"Basically it goes to the whole concept of 'liberty,' which is freedom from government itself. You have to go right back to the very construct which is the authority for government. Power comes from God to the individuals, to the people, and people create government.

"And it works. The point is that people have to be trusted to govern themselves. The government should be answerable to the people. I think we've lost a lot of that. The hope we have is that people can take it back when they get upset enough. But for the most part we've sort of stepped aside and let two parties identify two candidates, and nobody else really has much of a chance to step in there and say, 'Wait a minute. Let's take a hard look at what we really want to do.' And so we're left with two choices which have been selected for us by whoever is in power and whoever has the money to get those people elected in the primaries."

The State Committee is defended by Ed Bertorelli, Treasurer of the Party and one of its conservative members. He tells Massachusetts News that when it comes to federal candidates the Committee relies heavily on the analysis done by the national GOP, which studies electability of candidates and sometimes provides direct assistance to them.

Relative to candidates for state posts, he said, "The one thing we do have which we always insist on is that the candidates show they are actually working - you know, how many doors have they knocked on? Do they have a campaign plan? How much money have they raised themselves? I often hear, 'What's the State Committee going to do for me?' Well, the State Committee's not going to get you elected. I know that from experience."

Bertorelli added, "The other thing to keep in mind is that we did have 10 special elections the year before. So that was a real drain as well. There were 10 people who left. And we were limited with Mark Ferguson because we had given him $3000 within the same calendar year. His special election was in January so we had to give him a different kind of help for [the general election], in-kind help. But someone like Jerzy [Jachimczyk from Worcester] for example, he got $3000 each time."

Massachusetts News noted that part of the running commentary is that Weld and Cellucci have been very unhelpful to conservatives. Bertorelli responded:

"I never heard of any [examples] personally. People have told me this. And I've asked the staff this and I've made it clear this wasn't anything that I supported, but I've no idea first hand that people weren't supported because they were conservative.

"Weld of course is gone. I don't know the amount of money raised at functions that Gov. Cellucci came to, but they were in the thousands of dollars for each of the candidates. I can tell you that in my area [Worcester] he came out to Jerzy Jachimczyk. He did events for Mark Ferguson. He did some for Will Kincaid in Milford, and they are clearly more conservative than he is. Those are three that I know of anyway. The Governor really did get out and in the summer and fall period really did raise a lot of money for candidates. And at least for those three candidates, I don't think there was any mention of where they stood on anything. I happen to know them all personally and there was never mention of where they stood."

How Did the Democrats Become so Dominant?

The reason that the Democrats became so dominant in recent years lies in large part to the Dukakis and Weld-Cellucci administrations.

Dukakis was lionized by the liberal media who acted as his public relations agents. He added 5000 people to the state payroll in his first term from 1974-78. He was then beaten in 1978 by conservative Democrat Gov. Edward J. King, who cut the payroll by 10,000 employees. After King was, in turn, defeated by Dukakis in the next election, Dukakis not only restored the 10,000 but added more. In 1989 he signed the largest tax increase in Massachusetts history, then did it again the next year.

At the same time, Dukakis used dramatic photos of bridges falling apart to justify increasing the gas tax from 11 cents to 21 cents per gallon and raised $125 million. The American Automobile Association complained that despite having raised taxes for the purpose of fixing roads and bridges, only $6 million had been spent for roads and bridges. The rest had gone into the general fund.

When Dukakis announced his run for the presidency in 1988, again the media acted as his cheerleaders, nationally promoting the "Massachusetts Miracle." They asserted that Dukakis had shown great fiscal discipline while other states were going bankrupt from overspending. They suggested that it was a marvelous accomplishment that he had balanced three state budgets in a row.

The fact is that Massachusetts law requires a balanced budget. He had no choice. On the other hand, he broke the bank with his supplemental budgets and borrowing, bringing the state to near bankruptcy.

Dukakis had so heavily mortgaged the state by borrowing that as soon as the election was over, our bond rating plummeted, and the Massachusetts Miracle was exposed as the Massachusetts Mirage. The house of cards collapsed.

Part of Dukakis' inflated media image was created after the Blizzard of 1978 when he declared a state of emergency, shutting down the entire state for a week. He then appeared in the nightly news in fuzzy sweaters, looking as though he were personally commanding an army of snow removal equipment. What was not widely reported however, is that New Hampshire had dug itself out in a couple of days, then offered Massachusetts the use of its equipment. Dukakis said "No thank you," keeping the state shut down for several more days while he appeared on TV in his sweaters. The economic cost to the state of his self-promotion has never been calculated.

He did lose the election that year anyway, to Edward J. King, after citizens got wise to his financial sleight-of-hand.

During the media blackout of the truth about Dukakis during the presidential race, this reporter witnessed an unprecedented phenomenon. All over the state a spontaneous movement arose of citizens writing to their friends and relatives around the country. Realizing that a major fraud was being perpetrated on the rest of the nation, another blizzard swept the country, this time of letters, copies of newspaper articles and stories carrying the truth.

Part of that truth included the notorious leniency by that self-proclaimed card-carrying-member-of-the-ACLU toward convicted murderers. The exposure of the vicious Willie Horton rampage, which was not the first serious crime committed by such men released from Massachusetts prisons on "furlough" under a law signed by Dukakis, tipped the scale and he lost the election.

Brief Republican Revival

After decades of total domination by the Democratic Party in Massachusetts, a brief Republican revival was seen in the late 1980s and early '90s. While fueled by widespread anger at Democrat profligacy, the revival was led primarily by the late well-respected, conservative businessman, Ray Shamie.

He had for years promoted the principles of patriotism and good government at his company, Metal Bellows. He conducted monthly seminars on these subjects for his employees and encouraged his peers in other businesses to do likewise, with some success. He gave considerable sums of his own money to party building and to help individual candidates.

A number of Republican activists told Massachusetts News it was the force of his personality, leadership and generosity that sparked renewed optimism and activism among state Republicans. He has never been accused of self-interest but is universally respected as a decent man who truly had the country's interests at heart.

He founded two conservative think tanks in Massachusetts which mostly occupied his later years, the Beacon Hill Institute and the Pioneer Institute. He died of cancer in 1999.

Which Brings Us to Weld

The Shamie revival finally made electing a Republican Governor conceivable.

However, under Republicans Weld and Cellucci, the size of the state budget has almost doubled, enlarging even further the base of government workers to support office-seekers who would expand and protect government jobs, primarily Democrats. In addition to liberals appointed to powerful government jobs by Weld and Cellucci, the clientele of all those government workers, construction contractors, etc. also have a vested interest in big government. This entrenched political machine, combined with powerful union money and organization, make it extremely difficult for conservatives to get elected.

William Weld comes from the Rockefeller wing of the Republican party, most of whom are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Weld spoke of attending Planned Parenthood meetings as a child with his mother. He was married at the time of his election to the former Susan Roosevelt, whose wealthy family in New York provided much of his campaign funding. Weld had been supervised by Dukakis at the law firm of Hill and Barlow for five years after Weld graduated from law school, and they shared many of the same donors.

After the November 1990 election of William Weld and Paul Cellucci to the top statewide offices, party building all but ceased.

After the September 1990 primary election, where Democrats and Independents were allowed to switch and vote in the Republican primary, Weld felt no debt to the state party, which had supported Steve Pierce as the gubernatorial nominee of the pro-life, conservative state convention held in April 1990. Weld gave full credit to the homosexual activists who had supported him and he earnestly promised them payback. (This reporter heard Weld publicly, more than once, openly promise jobs to supporters if he were elected.)

Weld's election was partly due to a huge stroke of luck when his close opponent in the general election, Dr. John Silber, collided with liberal media in the form of popular news co-host Natalie Jacobson. His TV appearances with her depicted him as a grouch.

After he was elected governor, Weld installed his own people at the Republican State Committee, from whom social conservatives stood little chance of obtaining support. As payback for campaign support from homosexual activists, Weld pledged to veto any restrictions on homosexuals becoming foster parents. He also said "Homophobia is going to be extinct in Massachusetts by the time we finish our four-year term." And he worked at it.

Weld also was an avid supporter of abortion, even partial-birth abortion, a form of infanticide. He mounted a groundless challenge to pro-life delegates to the 1996 national convention. It failed and became a major embarrassment to him at the convention. Weld's liberal activism devastated donations to the party from conservatives in the state who saw what was happening, weakening the party even further.

Cellucci has continued and expanded Weld's pro-homosexual, pro-abortion agenda, particularly by his appointment of radical activists to the judiciary. He reaffirmed that agenda last month with the appointment of two Democrats to the Superior Court. One of them, Geraldine S. Hines, has long ties to the liberal Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law.

If Cellucci is confirmed as Ambassador to Canada despite the strenuous opposition of pro-family organizations in the state and now nationally, and Lt. Governor Jane Swift becomes Governor, she promises to continue the social agenda that underlies the current weakness of the party, focusing on "gays, women and fiscal conservatism."

Can GOP Mend Its Differences?

While most party members are agreed on fiscal conservatism, there is a real split between social liberals and social conservatives in the party. This has made it difficult to achieve a unified agenda that significantly differs from the Democrats, who, despite having a similar split, are more able to act as though they are united behind both fiscal and social liberal positions.

Some are now questioning whether liberal social policies actually undermine conservative fiscal policies, since they require contradictory philosophies. A social liberal supports government intervention into many aspects of people's daily lives. This requires big government - and makes fiscal conservatism impossible.

For example, government funding for abortion, gay-straight alliances, early retirement benefits for teachers despite a shortage of qualified teachers results in higher taxes and bigger government.

Despite claiming to have "cut taxes 41 times," the Weld and Cellucci administrations have nearly doubled the state budget in 10 years.

As a result of their policies, Weld and Cellucci have added more liberals to the state payroll, causing the ready-made campaign force for big government to be even larger, and making it even more difficult for conservatives to be elected.

Cellucci's appointment of Abner Mason as his Chief Secretary, is a good example. Mason is serving as the administration's primary advisor in making appointments to state boards and agencies, as well as filling other employment positions in state government. In other words, he is in charge of patronage appointments, a very powerful position. Mason is former vice-president of the Log Cabin Republicans, a national political homosexual activist group.

In the fall election, Mason recruited Israel Reyes to run against Democrat State Representative Jose Santiago in Lawrence. Why is this odd? Reyes is a liberal Democrat who had become an Independent in the fall of 2000 to vote for John McCain, which automatically registered him as a Republican. He did not try to revert to Democrat enrollment until it was too late. That's when Mason asked him to run as a Republican against Santiago, who though a Democrat, is more socially conservative than Reyes.

While there were no obvious alternative Republicans primed to run in the district, given scarce resources it would seem that they could have been spent on a better Republican somewhere in the state. Reyes, who lost the election, was rewarded for his effort with a job in the highway department.

Can We Restore Two-Party System?

The state GOP fielded very few candidates for State House seats in 2000.

A couple of organizations in particular seem to be seriously trying to address the problem of party weakness. The Association of Massachusetts Republican Chairmen (AMRC) and the Mass. Republican Society have both undertaken new initiatives. The AMRC, led by Weston Town Committee Chair, Dick Hersum, conducted a state-wide meeting last fall, producing a series of recommendations for revitalizing the party, the most important of which may be increasing the number of State Committee members from 80 to 160, with half selected by the local town committees.

Under state law, both parties now elect two members, one man and one woman in each of the forty state senate districts, every four years at the time of the Presidential Primary. The Democrats then add 80 more to their own committee. The AMRC suggests that doubling the number, in addition to modifying the bylaws of the state committee, would make the Republican State Committee more responsive to the grass roots and less susceptible to control by a governor.

A new organization called The Republican Society is working on the establishment of County Republican Clubs, which are meant to supplement, support and be a source of members for small or non-existent town committees. Its focus is building GOP organization through county clubs, providing a support network for candidates and a local voice for the party; honing the message of good government that made the national party successful; and encouraging the commitment of candidates to embrace the message and never back off despite pressure. The new organization will itself face pressure from liberal Republicans to compromise the message in an attempt to gain power.

The Republican Society is led by Ian Bayne, who recently served as Communications Director for U.S. Senate candidate Jack E. Robinson, III, and William Rivers, former Operations Manager for the Massachusetts Republican Party.

Bruce Hall is former Director of the Massachusetts Independent PAC for Working Families, which endorsed and helped elect several new conservative state legislators, including Democrats. He told Massachusetts News that he believes state Republicans' most important weakness is "lack of a clear agenda. The almost universal question is 'What does it mean to be a Republican?' What issues do Republicans stand for? Taxes are a non-issue now. Pro-life? School choice? Education? What is it? It seems the only thing Republicans in this state want to do is get to Washington."

One little-recognized factor in Democrat success is the powerful and near-universal backing of Democrats by unions, which use members' dues for political activities without members' permission. Recognition of the ability of unions to skew the electoral process is growing both in the state and nationally.

Bill Barnstead Opines

A former Republican State Committee Chairman in 1974, Bill Barnstead, has watched the party for over 50 years. He was Chair of Citizens for Eisenhower in 1952 and ran against Speaker Tip O'Neill. He brought Ronald Reagan into the state as a presidential candidate twice, in 1975 and 1976. Mr. Barnstead feels that the basic problem with the state GOP is that recent Republican governors have been selfish and greedy and have not built up the party.

He tells Massachusetts News, "To reestablish the party in Massachusetts would take a lot of sincere people who are not in it for themselves, who care about good government. It would take three or four years of hard work and sacrifice. Some would have to run knowing they won't be elected. It might take some real turbulence in the state before the party can revive itself."

Barnstead referred to a speech in January by novelist and Contributing Editor to the Wall St. Journal, Mark Helprin, to the conservative Hillsdale College. The speech was entitled, "The Way Out of the Wilderness" wherein Helprin said:

"Whereas European political crises are almost always about power, American political crises are almost always about truth, which is why Europeans almost always mistranslate and misapprehend us. ... President Clinton was able to ride out his impeachment not merely because he has the conscience of a slot machine, but because he and his partisans managed to convince the nation that the matter at issue was not truth but power. ... The heart of what a statesman says is in simple words that draw their force from the compelling circumstance that they are true, that, in the hurricane of words, they are the eye. ... The way out of the wilderness is the truth; recognizing it, stating it, defending it, living by it."

What's the Solution?

There does not seem to be any statesman waiting to take over where Ray Shamie left off. Based on the foregoing, it seems the GOP might reflect on the following:

• Although media bias, union power, and entrenched government workers and their clients are all part of the Democrat machine, the majority of citizens are more conservative.
• Since conservative ideas did win the Presidency, the conservative message should be researched and fine-tuned so it cannot be easily misrepresented as "mean-spirited," "radical," or "old-fashioned." Conservative candidates should be encouraged and supported.
• Republican officeholders should take advantage of opportunities to weaken the entrenched Democrat machine by reducing the size of government, and by making conservative appointments to boards, committees, agencies and the courts.
• Unions should be made to play by the rules, possibly with a Governor's Executive Order requiring that members be notified of their rights, like Governor Pete Wilson's of California.

The combination of a huge block of government workers and their clients who predominantly support liberal Democrats, vast union resources spent on political activities, and Republican governors whose policies and appointments only make things worse has resulted in an incredible shrinking GOP.

Sidebar:
Republican State Committee Should be Chosen by Local Caucuses

AMRC Makes Recommendations for Re-Vitalized Party

April 2001

The Republican State Committee should be chosen by party members in caucuses in cities and towns with the local committee in charge of the voting, the Association of Massachusetts Republican Chairmen recommended after a meeting of Republican activists last fall.

The Committee should be increased to 160 people who would serve for a two-year term, and the bylaws must be changed "to ensure the independence of state committee members."

The location of the Committee offices should moved out of Boston to a more accessible location for party activists and volunteers while also reducing overhead cost, the group said.

Other suggestions were:

• There needs to be a reason for Massachusetts citizens to vote Republican.
• We must find entrepreneurial leadership at the state committee and we should look out-of-state for an individual with a record of proven success in building or increasing party numbers.
• Coordinate all the various Massachusetts Republican organizations and PACs and get them to work together on achievable goals.
• The Massachusetts Republican Party has to reach out to minority citizens and give them a place at the table, like the recent formation of the Massachusetts Asian American Republicans.
• By 2002, find good candidates for all local, state and federal offices. Provide financial, in-kind services and support for every candidate.
• Expand our base of registered Republicans from the present 13%.
• Develop a long-range strategic marketing plan for the Massachusetts Republican Party using outside political consultants.
• Develop a statewide strategy to get our message to print and electronic media and strive to secure fair and balanced treatment.
• Answer the opposition's false statements and claims.
• Build a state-of-the-art creative web site with links to all state Republican organizations and conservative think tanks.
• Reorganize or re-engineer the operations of the Massachusetts Republican Party headquarters.¥ Our Republican message must resonate with voters and deal with issues of Massachusetts citizens' interest and concern.
• Require more of state committee members than just attending a monthly meeting.
• Require the state committee to issue a quarterly report of activities and a complete financial report. Post it on the web site.
• 25% of money collected by the state committee be sent to the town and city committees with certain conditions.
• Sit down with all regional and local newspaper editorial boards and talk about Republican issues and the advantages of a two-party government.
• Reinvigorate Republican town and city committees throughout the state by a partnership with the AMRC and the state committee.
• Work on bringing young citizens and women into the Massachusetts Republican Party.
• Town and city committees to search out, recruit and support candidates for school committee, board of selectmen, mayor and other elected offices.
• Make the state committee responsible to get the voting records of all elected Democratic federal and state legislators, and make them available to town and city committees and Republican candidates.
• Line up candidates for each house and senatorial race by March 31, 2001.
• Funds raised by the Republican party should not be spent on ballot issues.
• At the next AMRC conference, invite out-of-state party leaders that have been successful to come tell us how to achieve success

AMRC can be reached at P.O. Box 295 Weston, MA 02493

Sidebar:
Weld and Cellucci Pay Off Homosexual Activists

April 2001

The appointment of Log Cabin Republican Abner Mason to be Chief Secretary in charge of handing out political patronage by Gov. Cellucci is just the latest in a succession of political payoffs to homosexual activists.

Bill Weld believes he was elected Governor in 1990 because of the support of those activists even though he may have been in just the right place at the right time when his opponent, John Silber, stumbled disastrously. Weld spent his time while in office rewarding homosexual activists at taxpayer expense to the detriment of the state's children and families, according to many. His successor, Paul Cellucci, has done the same.

After the election Weld established the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth" and gave a State House office to David LaFontaine, a radical homosexual who was part of the gang that threw condoms and yelled obscenities at newly ordained priests at the Holy Cross Cathedral in Boston.

Weld provided $750,000 in the 1998 state education budget for activists to promote their radical agenda in the state's public schools, under the title, "Suicide Prevention for Gay and Lesbian Youth." Weld was called, "The most pro-gay governor in the country," by Bay Windows, Boston's homosexual newspaper,

The money was doubled the following year by Cellucci who put another $750,000 into the Health portion of the budget for the same use, giving $1.5 million annually ever since into the hands of David LaFontaine and his allies. The money is used to promote their agenda through almost 200 "gay-straight alliances" in public schools. Many of those clubs were forced on unwilling school principals who were threatened with lawsuits if they refused.

The title of the item, "Suicide Prevention for Gay and Lesbian Youth," has been an effective defense against those who protest that the statistics on suicide are being fabricated and that this money is actually being used to indoctrinate youth into the idea that homosexuality is a normal, natural and healthy alternative lifestyle. Those who protest this use of taxpayer funds to indoctrinate youth are met with the charge that they don't care if homosexual teenagers die.

The irony is missed that even if the claims of a higher suicide rate among homosexual youth were true, attempting suicide is a sign of emotional disturbance. Such teens need help, not acceptance and encouragement of this dangerous and addictive behavior. It is also folly to encourage experimentation among other teens who are advised by some of these programs to "consider the possibility they might be gay."

Gov. Cellucci has been an enthusiastic supporter of the homosexual agenda, appearing with homosexual activists frequently in their publications and refusing to meet with concerned parents who oppose the imposition of that agenda on their children.

A "TeachOut" conference in March 2000, partially funded by tax money at which teachers were given continuing education credits, taught children possibly as young as twelve the fine points of homosexual sex acts. Children were bused from around the state. Their parents and teachers had been told they would be learning about "tolerance."

Now that Governor Cellucci is being nominated as Ambassador to Canada by the conservative President George W. Bush, Cellucci is likely to find this history an embarrassment. When former Ambassador Alan Keyes visited the State House last summer and attempted to meet with Governor Cellucci to discuss the funding of the homosexual agenda, Cellucci refused to talk to or meet with him - not a smart move for an aspiring diplomat!

Several pro-family organizations have written to the entire U.S. Senate protesting his nomination and revealing his involvement and disdain for parental rights. The Parents' Rights Coalition led by Brian Camenker of Newton met on March 1 with staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which must approve Cellucci's nomination. The large Family Research Council has joined in urging President Bush to withdraw the nomination.

Jane Swift, who will become Acting Governor if Cellucci is approved as ambassador, says her priorities will be "gays, women and fiscal conservatives."

Copyright ©2001 Massachusetts News, Inc. Photocopying and data processing storage of all or any part of this issue may not be made without prior written consent.