To the editor:
Here are my comments about the Mass. Senate race for our district (Berkshire, Hampshire and Franklin). I watched debates, read the articles, saw and heard local TV and radio appearances and have seen FB posts for both candidates. There are major differences between the two! Hurrah, a clear choice.
As a treasurer for a candidate many years ago, I know how to “peek” at the campaign finance reports (Everyone can: check OCPF for MA, next report 10/31). As of the end of August, Adam Hinds campaign had reported $75, 067.00 in donations and spent $54,681.00 vs. Christine Canning reporting $3,185.00 and spending $2,922.00. Seems like a financial “Goliath” vs David. It is said Adam Hinds “is” the next Senator (even during the Democratic Primary). He is “the” Democratic machine designate. Another Goliath? Adam Hinds may have the Democratic “nod” but does he have knowledge about issues and a detailed plan of action?
I asked Christine about her supporters: she said they are “just folks,” not big money people, corporations, the media, unions or even the Republican Party. Born in Berkshire County, she is a widow and single Mom of two amazing teens, a former teacher (local and international), a small business owner, a published author and is working on her doctorate in education policy from UMass. Adam Hinds is the Democratic machine candidate; will he take his “marching orders” from the party and his donors?
Many politicians espouse to campaign finance reform but raise big money and spread it around within the “party”.
Christine’s goal is to run a financially responsible campaign, without incurring debt and beholden to no one.
Christine is independent of special interests — even the Mass. Republican Party. She, like David, is not skilled in the art of political “war,” but will protect and care for her charges: the citizens of this district. She is more about the “how,” the “fix” of issues. Christine is a proven champion of the “underdog” and disenfranchised standing in the fray and winning for those targeted. She has a history of digging into financial fraud, waste and abuse. Her economic policy is one of finding solutions, not platitudes. She supports small business because she has experienced it inside her own businesses. She is in favor of less regulation, lower taxes, thus more jobs.
Christine supports the second amendment and is concerned about the AG’s overreach. She has the endorsement of GOAL and an “A” rating with the NRA. She is a pro-life Catholic. She is pro veteran, education and law enforcement. She “listens”! She sees the person, not a label or a divisive issue.
She wants to be “our” problem solver. She is a “David” with smooth round pebbles and good aim. She is not a seasoned politician but one who wants to work for us, not any party. She certainly cannot be influenced or controlled.
Christine has challenged the Goliath of the Democratic machine, money and the influential. She has my vote. Does she have yours?
Kathryn Mickle
Dalton
