Barbara L’Italien was not the chief architect of the Alcohol and Meals Tax increase. The alcohol tax was initiated by the Senate not the House of which she was a member. The conference committee between House and Senate negotiates a final budget acceptable to both bodies prior to sending to the Governor for approval. I know Barbara did not like the alcohol tax but did not want to hold the entire budget process up delaying the vital delivery of vital local aid to cities and towns. That is called governing.
As for the meals tax, all L'Italien did was make it possible for communities to pass this alternative for generating revenue. Whether communities choose to institute such a tax is THEIR own option. There are certainly some communities that want that tax, and some that don't. Given that you are not a North Andover resident, you are perhaps unaware that we had two healthy debates on the issue last year. While I was against the tax (in fact, I campaigned against it, both times alongside one of L'Italien's former staffers!), the reason that it passed had nothing to do with L'Italien and everything to do with how North Andover's Town Meeting voted (and I don't recall L'Italien voting at that Town Meeting).

Bill Kelly, we both understand that Barbara L'Italien as Vice Chair of Ways and Means heading the Conference Committee June 5, 2009 made her the Architect and most responsible for getting the Alcohol and Meals Tax increases into the budget.

You realize that conference was 2 Democrats and 1 GOP from the House and 2 Democrats and i GOP from the Senate--majority rule.

If Barbara L'Italien opposed those taxes a 3-3 tie vote would have killed them. In a brutal Recession, worst economy since the Depression, and people struggling to make ends meet Barbara L'Italien made that effort tougher and encouraged consumers to head for the New Hampshire border grealy harming local businesses.

One Liquor store owner told me his business was off 40% thanks to Barbara L'Italien's tax raising efforts.

I refuse to cavalierly dismiss her actions as saying "she didn't want to hold the budget up" when that clearly demonstrates her lack of character and leadership. She doesn't do the right thing for her constituents because she didn't want to "hold things up?"

Jim Lyons held up the entire budget till he got answers from the Patrick administration regarding government spending. That's a leader. That's standing up for what's right. That's standing up for his district.

The only thing Barbara L'Italien stands up for is raising taxes and spending money.

Mr. Josephson, I stand by my statement that she was not the architect of the alcohol tax. When you are in a position of leadership that means you have to work with people even when you disagree with some of their ideas. Barbara was personally against the alcohol tax and after it's passage in 2009 voted to repeal it. http://www.hgazette.com/local/x154639899/Question-1-would-end-sales-tax-on-alcohol/print

I know this is inside baseball, but when you are in a position to serve your communities you have to ask yourself how can I be most effective and get 95 % of what my constituents ask for and need.

Bill Kelly, you make Barbara "L'Italien look worse by your last post.

Barbara L'Italien was the architect for the Alcohol/Meals Tax being instituted.
As Vice Chair of Ways and Means heading the Conference Committee which in secret/private meetings slipped them into the budget without a full House vote don't insult us saying she "was working with people even if she didn't agree with all their ideas" as a 'business as usual' political approach. So L'Ittalien's a go along to get along politician, even when she disagrees with the legislation? That she facilitates the passage of onerous legislation she personally opposes cause she's just a good foot soldier doing her job carrying the water for others? Is that the kind of person we want representing us? "Well, she didn't support the bill she was responsible for passing that upsets and doesn't represent you or the precinct so you can feel good about the fact it's only about "good governance."

If Barbara L'Italien opposed these taxes as an individual with strong leadership and intestinal fortitude wouldn't she have fought against them as Jim Lyons would have, or if upset changed her political party affiliation away from Democrat?

You're making excuses for her. But what you're really saying is Barbara L'Italien has the nerve to stand up to her political opponents, but no backbone whatsoever to stand up to her party, on principle, as Jim Lyons obviously does.

You again make Barbara L'Italien look even worse

The issue of strong bipartisan working relationships is relevant. Mr Lyons stated in the 2010 LWV debate that he would not support any idea generated by a Democrat.
He has not voted for the budget for the last 2 years and has been so partisan as to render himself isolated from his own party as well. Voting against everything and being an obstructionist means that when something is needed at the local level he will not be successful in getting it.

Jamison, if on is a tax and spender who thinks our government money should go to people who do not pay into the system, steal identities, mooch off the hospital system, steal our government services and vote in our elections then to THEM the tea party agenda IS Radical and extreme. They just forget to put "in my anti american opinion" they are extreme

Just my two cents, but why was was the truth not included in the next paragraph. If a ten time drunk driver told you in an interview that he had a clean driving record would you not inform your readers of that in the next paragraph? Babs is a very nice woman and she means well, I agree, but the deception in this story on her part is stunning. There is NOTHING bipartisan about Babs at ALL, and the readers deserve to know that.

Brian- I get what these Patches are about and that you need to crank these things out. If you stepped away from this and read it I really appears that you just repurposed a press release from her campaign. I am weighing in to present a different perspective, which is what social media is all about. If I thought Rep Lyons was in trouble I would take this article apart point by point, but he beat her once and he will beat her again. After which she will return to Treasury, because that's how things work in this state.

Jamison, I didn't just reprint a press release. The article is about her announcing her candidacy and shaping her campaign. Rather than include all of someone's comments in their statement, I summarized a lot of it -- making it clear that it was her speaking and not me -- and said she was running on a platform of bipartisanship and effective government and pointed out some examples she had given. Of course these articles are going to generate discussion, and that's great. But there was no bias in writing it.

I guess you support spending millions if not BILLIONS on illegals with no documentation, you apparently support government agencies spending our money with no accountability. If not for Jim Lyons we wouldn't now how much our state government is wasting on illegals. I would say forcing the government to be transparent with the way they spend our money is a hell of a lot more than howling at the moon..... unless you SUPPORT illegals getting government services and hiding it from those of us paying the bill.... then I guess you have to attack him since you can't come right out and say that.

Better add Tommy "I-run-a-fair-and-balanced-gossip-rag" Duggan to your list non-problem solvers.

I alwasy love it when ignorant people can't defend their stated positions so they have to resort to chidish name calling.

Hey "COOLISH" at least I am not a coward hiding behind a fake name. I put my name on what I write because I am not ashamed of myself or my positions. Too bad you can't say the same.

"Bipartisan legislators like Senator Bruce Tarr and Senator Bradley Jones worked with all parties to help pass a bill to rein in health care costs - to the tune of $150B - without compromising the quality of care." Please report to the Infirmary to get your meds checked.
There has been no healthcare savings in this state. If you are speaking of shifting costs form cities to unions that is just transferring the costs.
Where are the "savings"?
We had "Healthcare Reform" and the costs continue to rise. This is with the large infusion of Federal monies to prop up the system to sell it as a national template. The whole fiasco has been a failure.

and Barbara L'Italien attends every Town Meeting.?

Love the revisionist history, bill. The 5.1 B deficit in 2009 was due to world-wide recession. L'Italien voted for the state budget because it needs to be balanced and passed on time or state government shuts down and all services stop. Chief architect? The alcohol tax was added by senate to balance budget, and L'Italien supported its repeal in 2010. The meals tax is a local option for each community and was largely pushed by MA Municipal Assoc. Repeating your statements several times on a blog doesn’t make them true.

Thomas stated "L'Italien supported alcohol tax repeal in 2010."
She did no such thing.

Here's the chronology after she Architected the instituting of the Alcohol Tax:

11/18/09 House Bill 4348 Roll Call 09-264
* Rep Jones offered an amendment to the fiscal stability bill to eliminate Sales Tax on Alcohol to provide a stimulus and save business.
* Democrats offered further amendment to study the proposal to preclude a vote in the original RLO amendment.
* L’Italien voted yes to send it to Study killing the GOP bill to eliminate the Alcohol Tax.

4/27/10 House Bill 4600 Roll Call 10-362
* An amendment was filed to eliminate the Alcohol Tax as it primarily impacts lower and middle class consumers.
* Rep Kaufman filed a further amendment to require a Study of the impacts of the Tax repeal, precluding action on the original amendment.
* L’Italien voted No (Does not support the “Study” but does not necessarily support the elimination of the Alcohol Sales Tax). Rejected the further amendment, allowing a vote on the underlying amendment to repeal Alcohol Sales Tax.
Yes 88 No 67

Mr. Duggan - as you claim to be a journalist, why don't you afford the subject of the story the respect to which she is entitled. Her name is Barbara L'Italien and not using it is sexist and disrespectful. And I thought conservatives were neither.

Hey Bill

I know you have a narrative that you have to stick to (those who disagree with you must be sexist, racist, some other "ist" that you define to suit your needs, but my lovingly calling her Babs has nothing to do with the demons you cojure up in your head. And for the record, I have never claimed to be a "journalist", if you are going to try the typical Democrat style of ad hominem attacks because you cannot defend your position, at least do your homework and know what you are talking about.
I have shown Babs quite a bit of respect, far more respect than she gives to her opponent. But I get it, Bill Callahan, you have a side to defend and you don't have anything other than insults so that's what you go with. You should apply for a cushy state job you would fit right in.

I don't mind so much if someone is going to defend their party line to the end, right or wrong. It does not offend me at all that my friend Babs holds the exact opposite views on the function of government in a free society as myslef. She is fully entitled to believe illegals should vote. She is fully entitled to believe that the government should control every aspect of our lives. That is what a free society is all about.

It's when I see the dishonesty of calling herself bipartisan, and perpetuating to the public that she is "bipartisan" that offends me greatly.

I would be just as offended if Jim Lyons came out and said he was "bipartisan"... because he is NOT bipartisan either. They are polar opposites, and it's all a matter of priority. Jim Lyons defends the tax payer, Barbara defends the recipients of the spending of those tax dollars. I just want honesty among the candidates. You will never catch Jim Lyons pandering to the middle or misleading voters into thinking he is a moderate. I expect the same from Rep. L'Italian.

Good morning Mr. Duggan. I was commenting on your use of a pet name for a female person in the public domain. That specific behavior I find be be sexist. But I'm certain that you are a perfectly non-biased person who just made a mistake. Hate the sin, love the sinner.

IN response to Bil's comment: "Bill Callahan
7:36 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Good morning Mr. Duggan. I was commenting on your use of a pet name for a female person in the public domain. That specific behavior I find be be sexist. But I'm certain that you are a perfectly non-biased person who just made a mistake. Hate the sin, love the sinner."

Bill: just so that I understand your position. If I have a "pet name" for a woman it is sexist? Yes? Ok. If that is correct, what about my pet names for Daid "Where-is-He" Torissi? Or Lenny "Dee Da Deee" Degnan? Or "Da Mayo" Willie Lantigua? Is that sexism against men? And if not, why not? Or are you saying there a differnet standard for dealing with women? and if there is... isn't that.. sexism?
just wondering

.... a lowely sinner.

Mr. Duggan,
Barabra L'Italien special interests constituency should not be confused with being the same as being the resident citizens of the district that she represents. In truth, it's a tattoo of groups she panders to, including unions, the education/industry complex, government employees (SEIU), exploiters of the entitlement complex, loophole legislation for the connected with inside tracks, and those that benefit from illegal immigration. If one was to read her accomplishments, one would conclude that the taxpayers and private citizen advocation played no part to those ends. No Babs, you did not do all that by yourself.

Peter, I covered it when she collected signatures a couple months ago. Also, I didn't label this "Breaking News" or send out a bulletin with it. I was reporting the news of her official announcement. I have several posts up a day... most are not breaking news. In case you were wondering, "Turkeys at Sal's..." isn't breaking news either.

Thanks Bill! This was just an announcement of candidacy article. Further analysis of candidates will unfold in the coming months. As for bipartisanship, I guess the word is used so often that it means various things to people. It's a fascinating discussion though. Food for thought... I see it as maybe working across aisles and not so much to do with being a centrist. For example, look at Ted Kennedy. He was about as liberal as they get, by no means a centrist, yet he did work on a lot of big things with Republicans in the Senate and with Republican presidents. Ronald Reagan was by no means a centrist but he worked on things with Democrats. This usually involves compromise and finding common ground to build upon. A conservative Republican in the Massachusetts legislature, if he or she is ever going to get things accomplished, sort of has to work in a bipartisan way, despite ideology. The same can be said of a liberal Democrat in the NH legislature. And even with legislators in the majority parties, some bipartisanship is demanded since districts are made up of diverse politically-minded constituents.