OUR OPINION
The Bay State has a pragmatic, solutions-oriented chief executive that voters should not eject for a MAGA-adjacent challenger armed with ‘I alone can fix it’ platitudes.
Massachusetts voters face a stark choice for governor: A Republican candidate who claims independence but distracts from ties to MAGA world with far-reaching promises and platitudes vs. an incumbent Democratic governor who has overseen some real victories for the state despite the realities of governing amid chaotic external factors. By that standard, Gov. Maura Healey has earned another term.
Despite conservatives’ characterization, Gov. Healey has been a rather pragmatic chief executive seemingly more interested in solutions than ideology. Counter to the stereotypes dogging Massachusetts and Democrats, this Democratic governor has helped cut taxes (she signed the state’s biggest tax cuts in decades) and demonstrated a willingness to whittle back regulations (particularly snipping red tape around housing production and small businesses).
Yet Mike Minogue would have Massachusetts voters believe an affordability crisis touching millions of Americans can simply be laid at the feet of our governor. While our commonwealth faces higher prices than some of our fellow Americans — particularly for energy and housing — the reality is that some of the biggest drivers of everyday price increases we’re seeing at the gas pump or the grocery store reflect short-sighted policies originating far beyond the Bay State, from the war in Iran to a similarly ill-conceived tariff regime. As long as those policies remain in place, a governor’s role involves acknowledging and reacting to those realities in addition to proactively proffering policy. Mr. Minogue is disincentivized from publicly recognizing those realities shaped by a presidential administration he has supported — and not just with his votes as a citizen but with his considerable generosity as a donor.
While Mr. Minogue combines geniality with a salesman’s insistent persuasiveness, he ignores or misstates details, routinely blaming an amorphous “they” for all governmental waste, fraud and abuse.
When asked how he intended to vote on a state ballot initiative seeking to rewrite the law that limits the amount of tax revenue the state can receive each year, he indicated his support but also immediately attacked Gov. Healey over another proposed ballot question to reduce the state income tax that was removed from the ballot by the Supreme Judicial Court. When reminded that the governor had nothing to do with drafting or removing the income tax ballot question, Mr. Minogue insisted repeatedly that “they” were so ineffectual and “didn’t know what the capital gains tax meant.” But he had his facts wrong: The poorly written summary that caused the SJC to invalidate the question was actually approved by the initiative proponents’ lawyer.
Massachusetts certainly has its problems, but a candidate that overstates or oversimplifies them with an I-alone-can-fix-it attitude does not strike us as someone who can meaningfully improve the prospects for solving those problems. In fact, it strikes us as rather like a certain president that many Massachusetts voters and a growing proportion of Americans disapprove of — for good reason, in our opinion. Knowing the baggage that association with President Donald Trump brings to a Bay State campaign, Mr. Minogue downplays the partymate he fundraised for in 2024. Yet if his intentions are as independent and nonpartisan as he claims, one wonders why he ran as a Republican.
Given the current presidential administration and its retributive attitude toward states like ours, Gov. Healey contends it matters more than ever who our governor is in Massachusetts. There’s something to that, and a record like Gov. Healey’s matters because she’s been advocating effectively for our commonwealth since she was state attorney general during the first Trump administration. As the Bay State fortunately sees a steady reduction in opioid deaths, it’s worth remembering who was AG when our state and others reached a landmark settlement with the Sackler family (owners of Purdue Pharma), which put millions toward effective harm reduction programs that likely saved Massachusetts lives. Those headlines about restitution, steady progress on stubborn issues or federal overreach repelled don’t get as much attention as others, but they matter greatly for quality of life in our commonwealth.
Massachusetts is well-served when its governor shows a willingness for pragmatism coupled with the ability to pick the right fights on behalf of Bay Staters and pursue them with integrity. Voters shouldn’t discard that. The Eagle editorial board endorses Gov. Maura Healey for reelection.
