Updated at 2:30 p.m. Nov. 9
The 2022 Massachusetts governor’s race didn’t offer much in terms of campaign drama, but it did boast a strange, maybe even unprecedented dynamic. From the outset, Democrat Maura Healey cast herself as the natural successor to Charlie Baker, the outgoing Republican incumbent — a move that let her capitalize on Baker’s durably high approval ratings while also turning her opponent, Republican Geoff Diehl, into an awkward wingman in what was supposed to be a two-person race.
That strategy paid off on Tuesday, as Healey cruised to a commanding victory. Now, though, it raises a question: after campaigning as Baker’s spiritual heir, will Healey really emulate his fiscally conservative, socially liberal, and determinedly bipartisan approach to governance? Or will she chart her own course instead?
It’ll be months, if not years, before we know the answer. Still, as Healey begins her two-month tenure as governor-elect, one thing is already clear: she’s convinced a wide range of people with very different political priorities there's a good to great chance she’ll be an ally once inaugurated — in itself, a Baker-esque feat.
Engaging the business community
Consider the relatively upbeat expectations of Jim Stergios, the executive director of the center-right Pioneer Institute, which was largely aligned with Baker on policy matters during his two terms. Stergios isn’t pollyannish about the upcoming Healey era: he thinks she’ll be pulled left by what he calls a “hyperprogressive” legislature, and cites her support of Ballot Question 1 — which, if approved, would create a new surtax on the portion of incomes over $1 million — as an example of where that pull might lead.
Yet Stergios is guardedly optimistic that Healey will transcend it. Among other things, he notes that Healey’s invocations of Baker have been a campaign constant; that she’s frequently voiced support for tax cuts; and Healey's financial inner circle worked to boost Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll, a Democrat who’s highly regarded by the business community, in the Democratic primary for lieutenant governor. Driscoll won that contest and is now Healey’s running mate.
“I think Charlie Baker used to [say], ‘Talent is policy,’ and I think that’s actually the truth,” Stergios said. “Who you appoint really sets the tone for the kind of judgment you’re going to show … The fact that the Healey finance team, if you will, came in pretty strong in support of [Driscoll] during the primary tells me that perhaps [Healey] might be more open to that kind of governing. For me, that would be a very hopeful thing.”
Jay Ash, who served as Baker’s secretary of housing and economic development, now leads the pro-business Massachusetts Competitive Partnership, which hopes to address a number of factors — from taxes to high housing costs — it sees hurting Massachusetts in relation to other states. Ash’s take on Healey, which is largely based on her attentiveness during election season, is at least as sanguine as Stergios'.
“We’ve been impressed with her willingness to … engage the business community,” Ash said. “She’s been in to talk to our organization and other organizations during the campaign. Kim Driscoll has done the same. And what we’ve found is two leaders who understand the importance of a strong economy and what that means for residents … but also government, in terms of collecting tax revenues and being able to use those tax revenues to help advance other goals.”
That Baker allies like Ash and Stergios see Healey as encouragingly Baker-esque, at least in some areas, is a testament to how effectively she delivered her central campaign message. But that achievement comes with an equally impressive flip side: among advocates who’ve been far less bullish on Baker, there’s a widespread belief that Healey will take imp ortant steps that Baker didn’t — never mind the extent to which she’s married her political brand to his.
A leader in reproductive health rights
“I cannot imagine a more perfect executive to lead Massachusetts at a moment of extraordinary crisis for reproductive health rights and justice,” Rebecca Hart Holder, the president of Reproductive Equity Now, said of Healey.
Baker, it’s worth noting, issued an executive order safeguarding abortion access after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade earlier this year, a move that drew praise from reproductive-rights advocates. Yet in 2020, Baker vetoed legislation aimed at expanding abortion access in Massachusetts in the event of Roe’s reversal, saying he opposed a provision that allowed 16- and 17-year-olds to get abortions without parental consent. (The Massachusetts House and Senate subsequently overrode that veto.)
Today, Hart Holder cites the state’s 2017 contraceptive-access law — which she says should make one full year of birth control available to patients with a prescription — as a crucial piece of legislation that’s technically on the books, but still isn’t oper ating as intended. Now, she adds, the state has to implement even newer legislation that passed in July, after Roe’s reversal, and includes sweeping provisions aimed at protecting abortion providers and recipients, as well as access to reproductive healthcare moving forward.
“Passing legislation is the first step in making change,” Holder said. “Implementing that legislation is step number two. And we are certain that Maura Healey will be an extremely committed partner.”
In Massachusetts, where there’s widespread support for abortion rights, there’ll be no obvious political downside if Healey makes good on those expectations. But Carol Rose, the executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, hopes that the incoming Healey Administration will take action in ways that could be far more controversial.
For example, Rose notes that Healey has previously voiced support for supervised consumption sites for drug users, a strategy for minimizing harm from the opioid epidemic that the ACLU of Massachusetts supports. She'd like Healey to work to make that idea a reality in Massachusetts. She also wants Healey to push for passage of a law that would further limit the use of facial-recognition technology by law enforcement, even though Healey initially
balked at increased restrictions as AG before her office backed them.
A departure from — or echoes of — Baker?
In the past, some progressives have criticized Healey for being too attached to the prerogatives of law enforcement and insufficiently open to reforms. But Rose believes that critique reflects Healey's old role, and won't necessarily apply in her new one.
“As attorney general, she is the state’s chief law enforcement officer, and that’s the system that she oversees,” Rose said. “But as governor, she has the leeway now to work toward a more public- health approach … and to really mak[e] the investments, political and financial, that it takes to move away from efforts to criminalize our way out of things like the opioid crisis.
“It’s harder to do that, in some ways from the attorney general’s office, because your employees are prosecutors,” Rose added. “But … when you’re the governor, you represent everybody in the state.”
The anticipatory goodwill has its limits. Jonathan Cohn, the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, acknowledges that Healey will be (from his vantage point) better than Baker on a number of issues, from abortion rights to the environment to driver’s licenses for unauthorized immigrants. Yet Healey’s unwillingness, on the campaign trail, to speak frankly about where she parts ways with Baker left him perplexed.
“I have found it kind of strange that she doesn’t even go for low-hanging fruit when trying to describe how she would be different than Charlie Baker,” Cohn said.
On the other end of the political spectrum, former Mass. GOP chair Jennifer Nassour says that while she’d love to see Healey govern as a Baker-esque centrist, she just doesn't think it’ll actually happen.
“I’m cynical,” Nassour said. “Unless you really have an independent streak like Charlie Baker has, you get pulled in the direction of the loonies of your party.”
For the better part of 2022, though, that’s what Healey has signaled she plans to do. Skeptics might dismiss that as a crafty way to win the Corner Office. But it’s also possible that Baker’s tenure convinced Healey that centrism — broadly speaking — is what Massachusetts voters want when it comes to governing, not just campaigning. If so, Healey’s upcoming term could be more like Baker’s last two than almost anyone expects.
Clarification: This article has been updated to note that Healey's stance on the use of facial-recognition technology by law enforcement shifted during her time as attorney general.
