Matt Patrick Testified at Cape Cod Commission on Behalf of Local Businessman
Falmouth- Matt Patrick, candidate for the 3rd Barnstable District State Representative seat, testified Thursday, February 4 on behalf of local businessman Franco Raponi. Raponi owns an office suite on MacArthur Boulevard that houses non-profit Community Health Center of Cape Cod and New England Baptist Hospital both of which are looking to expand to provide more services to people in need of healthcare on Cape Cod.
“Franco is an incredible asset to our communities. In this instance, he took an eyesore of a sand pit and turned it into a tax paying business that provides reasonable rental rates for two badly needed nonprofits that are important for low income families on Cape Cod,” Patrick said. “This location is on a major highway near a commercially dense area and it does not disturb any environmentally important areas. There are no wetlands nearby or endangered species and Franco is spending a lot of money for a new denitrifying septic system as well as highway safety and access improvements. This is exactly the kind of local business that we want to encourage and I was happy to tell that to the Cape Cod Commission.”
Patrick also highlighted his experience with the Cape Cod Commission as one of the chairmen of the coalition that got the ballot initiative passed to establish the regional planning body. This is the first time he has ever spoken in favor of any proposal before the Commission.
Patrick served as the 3rd Barnstable District’s State Representative for five consecutive terms 2000-2010 during which he led the charge to close corporate tax loopholes resulting in millions of dollars back into the state budget. Patrick worked with constituents on issues of public safety, health and clean energy. He also successfully fought for the Sagamore flyover to alleviate traffic issues at Sagamore Bridge and funding for Bourne to educate the children from the Massachusetts Military reservation.
Patrick’s platform is available on his website. For more events or information about Matt Patrick and his campaign, please visit www.electmattpatrick.org
Matt Patrick to Participate in “From Service to Politics” Forum at Massachusetts State House
Falmouth- Matt Patrick, candidate for the 3rd Barnstable District State Representative seat, will participate in the From Service to Politics Forum at the Massachusetts State House to discuss leadership in public policy after serving in the Military, Peace Corps or AmeriCorps. Congressman Seth Moulton will address the attendees before several breakout sessions discussing public service followed by a group discussion. Patrick will lead one of the breakout sessions at the request of an event sponsor, Peace Corps to Politics. The event is Friday, January 22 5-7pm and is open to the public.
Patrick served in the Peace Corps in Ghana where he taught masonry and brick making from 1977 to 1979. “The Peace Corps was one of the defining experiences in my life. It changes how you view the world and the people in it and it definitely informs choices I make as a public servant or volunteer,” Patrick said.
Kristina J. Owens, Co-Founder of Peace Corps to Politics and a returned Peace Corps volunteer, reached out to Patrick to participate in the event because of his previous terms as a State Representative and time in the Peace Corps. “Peace Corps to Politics believes that Alumni bring a positive perspective to public policy and political leadership. We feel it’s an important perspective in our current political climate,” Owens said.
Patrick served as the 3rd Barnstable District’s State Representative for five consecutive terms 2000-2010 and worked with constituents on issues of public safety, health and clean energy. He has been a constant volunteer presence on Cape Cod since the early 80’s working with groups to protect and preserve the Quashnet River, Waquoit Bay, to address the homelessness problem on Cape and to establish the Cape Cod Commission.
For more events or information about Matt Patrick and his campaign, please visit www.electmattpatrick.org.
You can follow our campaign on social media and share it with your friends and followers! We are very active and want to hear from you about issues that matter to you and your thoughts and ideas for the district!
Congratulations to Tom Brady and The Patriots on today’s ruling! This is an excellent victory to celebrate as we head into Labor Day weekend; let’s make sure we remember why we have the weekend in the first place: unions.
Collective bargaining allows workers to protect themselves from abuses by management, provides a safety net in case of a workplace injury and ensures that people are paid a living wage that can support a family… and so much more.
We are right to feel encouraged by this decision today–whether or not a fan of The Patriots–because it highlights the importance of unions in every aspect of our lives and at every level.
Let it also remind us that the battle did not used to be in the courtroom, that full on class warfare and a violent struggle had to come to a head before we could have this weekend.
We still have some of these battles ahead. Not everyone is guaranteed a living wage. Not everyone can count on a weekend or even a day off. There are people who are one accident away from financial ruin. Let us stand together and march forward toward a brighter future where everyone has the opportunity to love their job and live a happy, healthy life without the weight of the world on their shoulders.
When I was elected as the State Representative of the Third Barnstable District, various pundits said to our incoming class that we would never work on legislation that would impact the lives of many people for the better. They were wrong and we did. Among many of the great things we were able to accomplish for people in the Commonwealth, there are two that have now spread across the country following our lead: Marriage Equality and The Massachusetts Health Care Act, which became the model for President Obama’s Affordable Care Act.
On marriage equality, there were several key votes while I was a state representative from 2003 through 2007. All of these votes took place in joint sessions of the House and Senate in the House Chamber. My good friend Senator Rob O’Leary sat with me in those joint sessions and we always had interesting discussions while listening to the speeches. It was heady stuff. During the first session, I told Rob I was wavering in favor of civil unions but he convinced me to support full marriage equality. All the votes were to put the matter before the voters in referendum questions.
Later, I spoke in favor of marriage equality noting that to enable changes to decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court regarding civil rights of fellow citizens by referendum vote is a betrayal of my oath of office to uphold our constitution and an abuse of the referendum process.
I’m proud to say I always voted in favor of marriage equality in spite of intensely ugly lobbying efforts not to do so from within and without my district. At one point, I walked out in the middle of Mass after my parish priest’s sermon in favor of allowing people to vote on the issue; it was a move dramatic enough to be noted by many people in my parish. Even today, I still hear gossip critical of me for subsequently going to communion after taking those votes. In the final analysis, I’m proud of my record on the issue and if I end up in hell, it won’t be because of my votes in favor of marriage equality.
More than anything else, I’m happy for all of our LGBT brothers and sisters making marriage legal for everyone in every state of our Nation.
The Massachusetts Health Care Act had to pass. We were spending an unbelievable amount of our state budget to pay hospitals for emergency room visits for the uninsured who were not getting preventative health care. In spite of having the most expensive health care system per capita in the history of the world, Massachusetts (and the US) still ranked among third world nations in terms of outcomes and overall health. It was a waste of money and our Republican Governor, Mitt Romney, joined the Democrats in writing the bill. I still believe we should go to a single payer system such as Medicare for all, but our bill and the Affordable Care Act are steps in the right direction. Millions of people in Massachusetts and the United States now have health insurance that they couldn’t afford before and it all started in our Commonwealth.
These are issues of compassion and equality. Massachusetts has always been a leader and a voice for people who need to be heard. I am proud to have had the opportunity to listen and act toward the advancement of the inclusive environment we started here and helped to spread across the nation. My thanks goes to the people of the Third Barnstable District for giving me that opportunity.
State Senate Candidate Matt Patrick Joining NYC Climate Change March
Plymouth-Matt Patrick, former State Representative from Falmouth and candidate for State Senate, will participate in the People’s Climate March this Sunday, September 21 in New York City, New York. A long time advocate for clean and green energy, Patrick looks forward to participating in an event designed to impress upon world leaders that Americans care about Global Warming and want to be part of the solution.
“Green energy is not only good for the environment, it is good for the economy. As soon as our national and state leaders come to that realization we will be able to make more progress towards fighting Global Warming. Many of our coastal communities in the Plymouth and Barnstable district are at extreme risk because of Global Warming and sea-level rise. We have an opportunity to help our environment and our economy by hosting offshore wind here in Southeastern Massachusetts, and events like in New York will help raise awareness of these issues.”
Patrick will join dozens of local citizens who are heading down to participate this Sunday.
For more information about Patrick and his experience with environmental issues, see his website at www.electmattpatrick.org.
State Senate Candidate Matt Patrick pleased with Democratic Turnout in the Primary
Plymouth-Matt Patrick, Democratic candidate for State Senate in the Plymouth and Barnstable District and former State Representative from Cape Cod, was pleased with the turnout in Tuesday’s Democratic Primary Election.
“Turnout was low overall, but I’m happy with the Democrats that did come out. I think it shows people are very engaged with this election cycle and I look forward to building on that momentum going forward with our unified ticket.”
Patrick has a strong record of legislative achievement from 10 years in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. He was unopposed in Tuesday’s Democratic Primary and outpaced his Republican opponent in most of the Plymouth and Barnstable District.
It would be good if people could take an emotional inventory of the root causes of their negative feelings toward the young immigrants from Latin America. Once people understand them, hopefully they will see that the now-defunct plan to house the children on the base for four months is separate from the overall immigration issue.
I did my own inventory to try to understand where people were coming from on the issue. Here is what I found. The problems of immigrants are the same ones we are experiencing … only more dire.
It is understandable why people fear immigrants. People are concerned that more immigrants will do even more to take away jobs and suppress wages in a process that has been going on since the 1970s. When I was young, I could always get a job in a factory that would support my family if I decided not to go to college. Many of my friends did. Then the factories began shutting down and moving away. The situation can be exacerbated by immigrants – legal and not legal – who can work for less money.
Americans are losing their jobs to overseas workers who will work for less when factories move out of the U.S. Most American manufacturing has moved overseas to take advantage of unorganized workers who have lower wages, drastically reduced benefits and few, if any, worker protections. Corporations that move overseas also have more options to pollute, because there is less environmental regulation.
Almost all corporations do this in the name of creating more wealth for their shareholders, which they claim is their only responsibility. That claim is debatable.
The end product to all of this is there is a lot less job security in America and a much greater gap between rich and poor, something that didn’t exist back in the 1950s through 1980s.
So, the concern that many Americans have about immigration is understandable. Anything that contributes to less job security for Americans is something that can and should be avoided. In addition, it irritates most people to know we can’t control our own borders.
I recently had the privilege of hearing the Rev. John Dorhauer, Southwest Conference Minister of the United Church of Christ, who spoke from his heart about the plight of the immigrants and why they are leaving their homes. He explained that there are three causes to the increased migration, not of the immigrants’ making.
The first two are products of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Alliance, which went into effect in 1993. NAFTA put the small farmers in Latin America out of business by subsidizing the corn producers in the states. Thousands of Latin American farmers found that they could not produce corn at the same price as American corn. They sold their farms to feed their families and many of them immigrated to the States to work on American farms. Where there were once many thriving small farms and villages, there is now only overgrown fields.
NAFTA also shut down roughly 30,000 small businesses by enabling big-box stores to move into Mexico. The big boxes undercut all the small businesses that once appeared on every small town’s main street. Sound familiar? Wal-Mart has replaced those businesses just as they have here at home. Here in the States, Wal-Mart pays its workers minimum wage while coaching them to get food stamps and other federal benefits, effectively shifting its responsibility to pay a living wage to the American taxpayer. What do the Latin American businessmen do to provide for their families? What would you do?
Last, there is the war on drugs that has made the Americans who consume drugs the financiers of drug cartels and their gangs in Mexico and Central America. These cartels and gangs have set up shop in every American city. They commit unspeakable acts of terror upon the people and children of Latin America.
The best way to stem the tide of immigration is to create better living conditions in Latin America. It is essential that all families be able to eat and keep themselves in basic necessities: housing, water and good health. They need work just as we do, and it doesn’t have to be a great-paying job.
The first thing we should do is eliminate the NAFTA subsidies for American corn producers. They now have price guarantees borne by the American taxpayer.
The next thing we should do is eliminate the dominance of big-box stores and make them pay living wages, both here and in Latin America. How do you do it? We should implement legislation to regulate corporations similar to the way the Community Reinvestment Act did banks. Corporations should play by our rules in order to keep their charters … rules that benefit the common good both here and in other countries. It would help if the rules were international in scope.
Finally, we must do more to reduce drug use in America. We need to provide treatment instead of mandatory jail time for nonviolent drug offenders. Putting them in jail only perpetuates the problem. To reduce the use of drugs, we should provide people with well-paying, family-supporting jobs so they can raise families and become responsible taxpaying citizens.
Bringing manufacturing home and addressing our energy needs with clean-energy alternatives, like offshore wind turbines, smart grids and energy efficiency, is our future, one we need to embrace to help industry create these jobs.
Matt Patrick is a candidate for the Plymouth and Barnstable Senate District.
It seems as if many of the recent comments regarding the proposal to bring immigrant children to Massachusetts bases are misleading in their assumptions. The Governor answered our questions based on Homeland Security information, but that is not good enough for opponents, even though everyone seems to agree that we ought not to make this a political issue. It seems obvious that these people would rather question the honesty of the Governor, the Senate President and anyone from the Federal government to create doubt in the minds of people who are honestly looking for answers to very important questions.
I took the time to speak with the Governor’s office and with representatives from Health and Human Services. As a result of those interactions, I am impressed with the State’s willingness to talk and provide answers to what I agree are very important questions; the dialogue with these hardworking people has helped me draw conclusions based on facts rather than rhetoric. My conclusions are that, provided this does not cause harm to our local communities or cost the Commonwealth any money, we absolutely should extend our hands to help those in need during a traumatic time in their lives. In most cases, it probably won’t get any better for a while. Why should we do this? Because we can. I have assurances from the administration that the towns will be included in the negotiations for the MOU.
Let’s examine the most frequently listed reasons for opposing the plan. First, it has been implied that the decision has already been made by the Governor to bring the children here to Massachusetts, but that is simply not the case. According to Homeland Security and the Governor, the bases must be evaluated for their suitability by Health and Human Services. If the bases are determined to be suitable, then and only then would the Department of Health and Human Services and Homeland Security enter into negotiations with the Commonwealth and nearby towns to work out the details of a memorandum of understanding (MOU). The Towns will be at the table to discuss their concerns and get assurances written into the MOU at these meetings.
We are also told to believe that either Westover or Otis are the only destinations in the Nation for the 57,000 immigrant children that have come into our country. Again, this is not the case. There are at least four other states: Arizona, California, Texas and Oklahoma that are already taking many more of the immigrant children. In the Boston Globe (7/29/14), Mayor Jon Sharkey of Port Hueneme, California, one of the host cities for a temporary processing center said, “It’s been virtually invisible to us. It’s had no impact.”
One elected official says that we can expect more than 1,000 children at the site. Even if more than 1,000 children cycle through there what difference does it make? There are still only 1,000 beds available at a time meaning that no more than 1,000 children could occupy the base during any given period. The entire effort will be paid for by the Federal Government, another fact that several elected officials repeatedly ignore.
Opponents say that after being processed, 80% of the children will be placed with host families or friends and the other 20% will be put in foster care. As it turns out, the 80% placed with family and friends could be anywhere in the United States, not just in Massachusetts. Having one of these temporary processing sites does not make it any more likely that the children will remain in Massachusetts. The July 28th Globe article cites Julie Flanders, an immigration lawyer from Texas, as saying, “That’s not going to make them stay there.” Massachusetts gets about 3% of all the immigrant children who are placed with families or friends, regardless of where in the states they were processed.
It has been suggested that the remaining children will most likely be placed in foster care within Massachusetts and become a burden on local medical, educational and ancillary costs involved with keeping them rather than staying on the Federal dime. Again, this is wrong. There is only one foster home in the Commonwealth with 20 beds where the children could be located and it is funded by the Federal Government. The Federal Government also has funding for the 3% of immigrant children that are living with family or friends that may attend local schools.
Clearly, these folks have decided not to recognize any information provided by the Federal Government or the Governor as truthful and instead they have chosen to distort and discredit that information.
It’s easy to pick and choose bits of information that make it sound less like we are turning away helpless children and more like we are protecting our communities from new demands on our tax base. It’s easy to look the other way and pretend those kids will be fine and hope that someone else will be there to give shelter and mercy to them. The law signed by President Bush entitles these children to be treated properly while they await their disposition in court. At the end of the day, it’s easy to fail at upholding the long tradition we have here in Massachusetts as people who care about others regardless of who they are. However, once they understand the facts, I believe that the citizens of Massachusetts will agree that providing housing on our military bases is the least we can do for these children.