Barrett Outlines Political Vision for State, Nation

State Sen. Michael J. Barrett '70 says he has no political aspirations.

It's an odd statement coming form a man who has a national reputation as an advocate for school reform. And that's no small feat for a mere state senator.

Comfortably ensconced in his wood-paneled office at the State House, the Cambridge senator--whose district includes Cambridge, Watertown, Belmont and parts of Allston-Brighton--says he cannot chart his political career. Many political supporters, however, say that he is destined for a higher post.

A lawyer and full-time politician, Barrett has earned a reputation not only as a crusader for educational reform but also as a shepherd of one of the country's first gay and lesbian anti-discrimination laws and an unyielding antagonist to Senate President William Bulger.

This reputation coupled with his grassroots approach to politics will be his ticket to a bright political future, Barrett's backers say.

Barrett's political involvement began during his years as an undergraduate. He was intimately involved in the anti-war movement, was a member of the University-wide student-faculty advisory council and was a magna cum laude graduate of the College.

He was elected to the state House of Representatives in 1979 and to the state Senate in 1987. In addition to his state senate duties, Barrett currently serves as vice chair of the education and job training committee of the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Despite hedging about any higher political aspirations in the future, Barrett has a clear political vision for the state, as well as for the nation.

Barrett pushed for lengthening the school year for most of his five-year senate career. Not only has Barrett relentlessly plugged bills for educational reform in the senate, but he also authored an article that launched both his cause and himself into the national spotlight.

"With people worried about the direction of the country, the strength of the economy, and the emerging competition from our friends in Europe and Asia, it is time to give the matter [of a longer school year] another look," wrote Barrett in the November 1990 issue of The Atlantic Monthly.

`World-Class Excellence'

According to the senator, the nation will "not get to world-class excellence" if the public education system remains intact. Barrett advocates longer hours in school, standardized testing, standard minimum expectations for curriculum, a school choice system based on the Cambridge public school system and a unique proposal for an "hour-glass" distribution of authority in the school system.

Under Barrett's hour-glass design, the power to determine curriculum will rest with the parents and with state and national government--taking control away from local school boards.

Barrett warns that unless there is "radical change" in the way the government molds the future of the public schools, private schools will reap a new population of students-- those dissatisfied with declining public education.

But Barrett says the radical change embodied in Christopher Whittle's Edison Project--which would create a chain of affordable private schools nationwide--will rob the public schools of its middle-class "customer base."

The revolutionary change, says Barret, must be achieved by working within the public school system, not be abandoning it.

And the first step to changing the system, says Barrett, is to keep the students in school longer.

Barrett's call for extending the Massachusetts school year from 180 to 220 days not only provoked the attention of educators and politicians in the Commonwealth, but also turned the heads of natioanl leaders.

Newspapers across the Bay State penned editorials and articles on the school year issue that Barrett championed virtually singlehandedly on Beacon Hill.

And although some publications dubbed his proposals "common sense idealism" and contended that his plans "won't happen in our lifetime," most lent support to his efforts and hailed his reform recommendations as long-overdue.

"The issue [of a lengthened school year] will no doubt raise heated debate and that's good," wrote Boston Globe columnist Christine McKenna. "But someone had to bring the argument to the floor, and for that, Barrett deserves a gold star."

In April, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Thomas S. Foley appointed Barrett to a newly-formed National Education commission on Time and Learning. The commission is part of President Bush's educational reform plan, America 2000.

While his championing of the issue of educational reform brought him into the spotlight most recently, Barrett first earned his reputation as a leader in 1989 after spearheading the successful effort to pass a gay and lesbian anti-discrimination law.

Picking up the two-decade-old effort to pass the civil rights legislation when he arrived at the State House, Barrett is considered by many gay and lesbian activists to be the lifeblood of the movement to write the antidiscrimination bill into law.

The watershed passage of the bill made Massachusetts the second state in the country behind Wisconsin to have such a liberal civil rights law.

The law, first introduced in 1973, prohibits discrimination against homosexuals in employment, credit, housing and public accommodations.

It seeks to protect people from discrimination on the basis of their sexual preference, just as it does on the basis of their sexual preferences, just as it does on the basis of sex, religion and ethnicity.

"He did a terrific job shepherding the law...it's been a major victory for us," says Katherine Triantafillou, member of Cambridge's gay and lesbian activist group, the Lavendar Alliance.

She adds that the law is "one of the pieces of the puzzle" that has propelled the momentum for passage of similar laws in other states.

"For Massachusetts it's completely changed the spirit of the gay and lesbian community," says Gary K. Daffin, co-chair of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, the oldest the largest homosexual rights organization in the state.

Barrett's interest in reform also extends to Beacon Hill itself, where the Cambridge politician earned the reputation as "the thorn in Bulger's side."

Barrett has frequently sparred with State Senate President Bulger on proposed political reforms. But Barrett denies that his relationship with Bulger is antagonistic. Rather, Barrett simply says the odd couple "disagrees very much on the future of the Democratic Party."

Bulger is "not an evil man at all," says Barrett.

Nevertheless, the Cambridge legislator says he considers Bulger's leadership style tightreined.

"The problem is that you have a system that requires a certain degree of passivity on the part of the rank and file," Barrett says of the senate hierarchy. He criticized Bulger's "top-down management style that runs contrary to all the precious thinkings about leadership."

In order to curb Bulger's influence, Barrett joined a game of power politics when he actively campaigned to block the re-election of Bulger's leadership team during the months before the in-house elections in January. In his letter-writing campaign, he asked colleagues to withdraw support for Bulger. Barrett's challenge posed perhaps the greatest threat to what the Globe called "Bulger's 12-year hegemony in the senate."

`Bubbling With Ideas'

Barrett says that under the leadership of Bulger, junior members of the legislature have been cut off form authority. And Barrett says this style of management stifles creativity.

"The senate has not been bubbling with ideas. It hasn't been up to the challenge of rebuilding the public faith in government," Barrett says "And I think we can do much, much better."

Barrett failed in his bid to block Bulger's re-election to the senate presidency. But Barrett and Sen. Lucile Hicks (R-Wayland) were successful in their efforts to limit the unilateral power of both Bulger and Senate Minority Leader David Locks (R-Sherborn) to appoint committees and immobilize legislation before it ever reaches the senate floor.

Although his attacks on Bulger are often seen as a futile attempt to redesign an established part of the political landscape, Barrett says his efforts have improved the senate as an institution.

"I think we've opened up the institution quite a bit," Barrett says. "People have been interested in covering the battle and have ignored the aftermath."

In part because of Barrett's efforts, the senate has guaranteed debates every two years on its internal power arrangements.

"I feel victorious, although no one has handed me a crown with a scepter or an Academy Award," Barrett says with a laugh.

But as Barrett sees it, his efforts to reform the Massachusetts senate are only part of a greater vision of American government.

In addition to redistributing authority in the State House Barrett says he believes American leadership must be redefined.

"I grew up during the time of John F. Kennedy. These were years of enormous hope," the Cantabrigian says. "What JFK did for us as youth, we will have to do four our selves in middle age."

Barrett calls for a return to the quintessential American leadership and "untapped idealism" of Kennedy. But while the senator has a clear conception of what course American politics should take, he himself, is unsure of his own political future.

When pundits speculated that Joseph P. Kennedy II might abandon his U.S. House seat two years ago to seek the governorship, Barrett says he considered making a bid for the position. But now, Barrett appears to have forsaken any designs he had on the House seat, saying that Kennedy is "just settling in" and that "he's doing a wonderful job."

Although Barrett does not flatly deny any higher aspirations, he says his family--his wife Nancy and twin daughters Hannah and Lily--will be important factors in deciding whether to seek another office.

But Barrett's aides and many of his constituents say they believe the Cambridge senator has what it takes to make it to the national political stage.

Kenneth A. Bamberger '90, Barrett's legislative aide and the former campaign manager for Cambridge City Councillor Francis H. Duehay '55, says he is struck by the intelligence Barrett shows when he deals with the complexities of various issues.

And Bamberger adds that when he visited neighborhoods asking for signatures to put Barrett's name on the ticket in the upcoming senate race, he found that Barrett had a loyal constituency.

Barrett has gained a particularly large following from the special interest groups he has served over the course of his career.

"We're always supportive of people who champion our cause," Daffin says. "He'd be terrific in a higher office."

Barrett is up for re-election in the fall and his supporters don't seem to be worried at all. He's not expected to face a challenge and he long ago demonstrated his ability to win even in a tight campaign.

But his constituents should not be surprised if they do lose Barrett in the future. The legislator has created a strong consolidated power base during his two-decade political career and that, supporters say, makes a higher office within his grasp.

Barrett himself does admit, "I can see myself in a higher political office."

But when and where, according to legislator, depends on "whether there are useful things I can accomplish" and "whether my political course is favorable." And that, says Barrett, has yet to be determined.