Democrat Gov. Maura Healy is fortunate she reigns in a one-party state.
Otherwise, she would have been rapidly taken to duties over her dealing with of the disruptive and dear unlawful immigrant invasion of Massachusetts.
But she will get a go as a result of there aren’t any Republicans of any state-wide stature round anymore to take her on over the problems. The GOP in Massachusetts has been worn out.
Yes, Healey’s predecessor former Gov. Charlie Baker was a Republican, if in identify solely. But he ruled like Democrat, which is why the Democrats cherished him.
And Democrats can relaxation assured that Baker voted for Healey over GOP conservative Geoff Diehl within the 2022 gubernatorial election.
Not solely was Diehl defeated, however the Democrats went on to win all six of the state’s constitutional workplaces and preserve its overwhelming management of the Massachusetts Legislature.
The few Republicans who survived within the House and the Senate are those that go together with the Democrats anyway.
So, there is no such thing as a opposition and no noteworthy Republicans left to take Healey on.
The Democrat Party controls Massachusetts, from high to backside. And it’s the uncommon Democrat who will criticize Healey and danger being disciplined and cancelled by the progressives who management the celebration.
Consequently, it’s the Democrat Party that bears the onus for the unlawful immigrant mess that has thrown the state into such turmoil that Healey needed to declare a nationwide emergency and name out the National Guard to take care of it.
The Democrat mindset on unlawful immigration was spelled out succinctly by former Attorney General Martha Coakley, who Healey labored for, when she acknowledged, “Technically it’s not illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts.”
Given what is going on in Massachusetts, she could also be proper.
More than 6,300 unlawful immigrant households are actually dwelling in overwhelmed state funded shelters and in inns and motels throughout the state. And extra are coming.
They are offered free housing, meals, medical care, clothes, education, transportation, safety, telephones, interpreters and so forth, costing Massachusetts taxpayers $45 million a month. On Wednesday Healey requested the Legislature to applicable $250 million extra.
The phrase has gone out that Massachusetts is the one state within the nation with a “right to shelter law” which is interpreted to imply that it should present shelter to all homeless households.
It was handed in 1983 following the outpouring of sufferers from psychological establishments that Dukakis had shut down, in addition to for the overall rise in homelessness.
Which is all proper. Only when the proposal was signed into legislation by a liberal Democrat governor it was geared toward serving to relocate homeless households who have been residents of Massachusetts, not unlawful immigrants from world wide.
The legislation particularly states that anybody “who enters the Commonwealth solely for the purposes of obtaining benefits under this chapter shall not be considered a resident.”
This would seem to use to 1000’s of unlawful immigrants who’ve descended upon Massachusetts looking for help.
But since there may be hardly any politician round to help or implement the legislation — it was, in any case, handed 40 years in the past — Democrats are free to disregard it or interpret it anyway they need with nobody round to query them. Which is what they do. They management every part.
Healey wouldn’t even contemplate suspending or repealing the legislation in order that the state might catch its breath anyway. After all, technically it’s not unlawful to be unlawful in Massachusetts, proper?
“No, Healey said on the matter. “I was never going to end, nor did I have the authority to end, the right to shelter in the state.”
Of course, she has the correct to amend, curtail or repeal the legislation. She is the governor. All she has to do is file laws to do it.
But she received’t. It would by no means get via the Democrat-controlled Legislature anyway.
That is among the outcomes of dwelling in a one-party state. It’s their means or the freeway.
Peter Lucas is a veteran Massachusetts political reporter and columnist.