Decline and Fall of Reform

Not only did the Cambridge Civic Association lose control of the School Committee in the November sixth election, but it nearly lost control of the City Council as well. This does not mean that Cambridge voters tired of the CCA as a reform organization; it means that they were dissatisfied with the CCA as a slate of candidates.

In what seems to have been a mood of gross overconfidence, the CCA included only a few strong candidates among the thirteen it endorsed for the City Council and the School Committee. As a result, the voters elected the strong candidates with overwhelming majorities, but either by-passed the weaker ones altogether or placed them well down on the winners list.

The CCA's majority depended on the number of second and third votes gained by W. Donnison Swan '17 under the proportional representation system--an unpredictable source of strength to say the least. Swan happened to pile up just enough of those votes to win last position among the nine successful candidates, thus assuring the CCA of a precarious majority. The CCA was not so lucky in the School Committee contest, where it won only two seats out of six.

The independents who won do not share any program such as their CCA colleagues do. To the extent that these independents dominate Cambridge government, legislating will be a matter of reconciling a plethora of conflicting opinions. The CCA's broad program for continued reform will be lost in the constant necessity to compromise, and legislation will consequently lose direction and purpose.

Because it relaxed and failed to endorse the most powerful candidates possible, the Cambridge Civic Association must take most of the blame for this. If it does not regain the vigor necessary to keep Cambridge voters interested in good government, the next election will be even more disastrous.