So why are more candidates -- eight -- running for this office than any of the other down-ticket constitutional offices?
And why am I just getting an email last night from one of the candidates telling me that after three months of trying to tell people what she would do if elected, she has now decided that if she is elected she will push for shutting the office down?
From the email:
"What will you do if elected?" seems like such a simple question.
If the office of Treasurer is significant why is this such a hard question for me to answer? The reason is that the most meaningful duties have been stripped from the office over the preceding decades.
...
As a result, I believe the time has come to eliminate the constitutional office of Treasurer.
Melinda Wheeler hasn't put this on her website yet. A skeptic might be forgiven for wondering if this is just a stunt to revive her campaign. And it is pretty hilarious trying to imagine a candidate struggling for three months trying to answer the most basic question in any campaign. Nevertheless, her Republican opponents should be made to answer whether they agree or disagree with disbanding this office that would serve us better as a part of the Finance and Administration Cabinet.
Another fun thought would be to get the Democratic candidates arguing with each other about how important the Treasurer's office is to the future of the Commonwealth.
And where is Jonathan Miller on this? What have you been doing with your time these last eight years, big boy?
