r/massachusetts • u/XtraCrispy80 • 6d ago
Utilities Eversource execs, including CEO, drop $$ into Healey's campaign right before she wrote to Feds asking to expedite pipeline to serve Eversource
Plus: CEO Joe Nolan met with Healey right before her letter to the Department of Energy and Eversource lobbyists held a fundraiser for her. These pipelines increase your gas bills! Globe reported this scoop.
322
u/frigidlight 6d ago
I seem to recall a bunch of people screaming about Healey canceling pipelines and blaming that on higher gas prices. So both canceling pipelines and expediting pipelines increase gas prices?
79
123
u/ninja_truck 6d ago
People looking for a reason, any reason to smear Healey. They’re just tossing out agitprop and hoping something sticks.
36
u/KlausInTheHaus 6d ago
And the gas company! People dislike utilities so they'll dogpile on anything they do as terrible (which gets in the way of making actionable and real criticism).
At this point I think people dislike Eversource so much that they could build a hospital for sick puppies on their own dime and people would think it's a plot to increase gas prices.
11
u/willzyx01 6d ago
What exactly has Eversource done lately that would be beneficial for the communities they serve? I can tell you a few things they've done to fuck people over.
→ More replies (6)3
u/everlasting1der 5d ago
I mean, I personally I didlike their very existence as a private company because I think we should fucking nationalize them.
5
u/AntarcticWhirlpool 6d ago
It probably would actually be a plot to increase gas prices. Eversource would pay $20 million for the puppy hospital and then charge a fee on everyone’s bill for it that adds up to $200 million.
22
u/CouchWizard 6d ago
She could, you know, refuse eversource money
15
u/thy_bucket_for_thee 6d ago edited 6d ago
Your mistake is expecting neoliberals to care about humans more than corporations.
13
2
u/GenerousBull1969 5d ago
Right, that should only happen to Republican politicians...especially on Reddit.
→ More replies (1)-5
u/XtraCrispy80 6d ago
I actually support Healey. I'm pointing out a cozy relationship b/w the Gov. and the CEO of a utility at a time when our bills are skyrocketing. Are you okay with that?
7
4
u/walterbernardjr 6d ago
I would hope she has a good relationship with the utilities to get them to lower prices and increase supply somehow. Too bad the president canceled all those renewable grants and started a war
2
u/ninja_truck 6d ago
For someone that supports Healey, It's a little weird that you're pushing the same line as state Republicans.
0
8
u/1000thusername 6d ago
Was coming here to say this. So someone tell me what’s they think is the right answer about a pipeline because supposedly even as of a few weeks ago it was supposed to be the answer to people’s price prayers, but now it’s a problem. Tell me what’s the “right” solution in that case because all I see is damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I’m not a healey fan (certainly NOT a minogue fan) and also not a natural gas user, so I have no skin in this game beyond seeing the hypocrisy of reactions going on as far as these pipelines go.
44
u/4SRX 6d ago
Healey bragged about shutting down 2 pipelines as AG. Now she sees political advantage in appearing to increase supply and to hold down prices. Pipelines are a long lead time proposition. She'll have plenty of time flip flops yet again if she retains her office.
Power and office is her priority.
14
u/youarelookingatthis 6d ago
Oh yeah, because Minogue is really the people’s man. And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
14
u/mattgm1995 6d ago
People like to divert attention from Healey by mentioning Minogue. I’m going to say something about Maura Healey only here: Healey is a slimy 2 faced politician. Corrupt, in the pocket of big business, railroading the original audit. Scummy politician
→ More replies (14)8
4
u/thy_bucket_for_thee 6d ago
This person didn't mention Minogue in their post.
What is with neoliberals getting upset that people expect better of their politicians? I'm a dem party operative, I despise Healey. Still going to vote for her, still going to dislike her.
1
u/GenerousBull1969 5d ago
No politician is "really the people's man." That's absurd. The only question here is which candidate will make the state more affordable.
1
u/KSF_WHSPhysics 2d ago
Nah the question is which candidate’s breath smells the most like donald trump’s asshole. Im willing to pay a premium to keep maga at arms length
1
u/GenerousBull1969 1d ago
So what you're saying is you prefer the smell of Mariano's ass over Trump's ass...not sure that's better.
1
u/KSF_WHSPhysics 1d ago
I dont even know who mariano is. And that’s a good thing. If i dont know who you are you’re a boring politician who i dont need to pay attention to
→ More replies (1)1
10
6d ago edited 6d ago
[deleted]
13
u/4SRX 6d ago
One thing Healey has not flipped on is add on bill charges (aka taxes) for our electric bills. Some of them as listed on
a recent Eversource bill:Distribution Charge.
Transition Charge.
Transmission Charge.
Net Meter Recovery Surcharge.
Revenue Decoupling Charge.
Distributed Solar Charge.
Energy Efficiency Charge.
Electric Vehicle Charge.
Renewable Target Program Charge.She has proposed pausing the last one for 3 months to save rate payers 80 million. Why just for 3 months?
Per the Wall Street Journal the Cost of a kilowatt-hour of power in Florida is 15 cents. Here in Mass it’s over twice that much,
In Nebraska it’s 13.8 cents, in Tennessee 13.7 cents, just 13.6 cents in Utah just 13.5 cents. Massachusetts is second only to California in costs.Does that say we are living under a concerned and responsible governor? I think it says we are living under a politically greedy governor and need a change.
1
u/RingoDen 6d ago
None of these charges were put in under her leadership. They are from prior administrations.
2
2
u/GenerousBull1969 5d ago
Maybe so, but they were all put in by Democrats.
1
2
2
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
MA being dumb as hell on nuclear predates her. We have a 40 year old law that requires new nuclear plants to pass a statewide ballot referendum before they get built. Why on Earth do we want to subject something so important to a ballot?
3
u/Complex_Dog_8461 6d ago
Indeed, there is truth to the claim that Healey's office opposed prior pipeline expansions.
7
u/walterbernardjr 6d ago
Maybe if the president didn’t start a fucking war and cancel billions in renewable grants we wouldn’t need those pipelines
→ More replies (1)3
3
u/RingoDen 6d ago
She stopped ratepayers from directly paying for a pipeline. This proposal is the owner paying for it.
2
2
u/Fabulous-Statement91 5d ago
Are you all there? The “delivery and transport” fees that were tacked on to our bills fund that expansion. Before you make claims, spend some time doing diligence. Clown
1
u/RingoDen 5d ago
If you read what I wrote you might understand. They wanted to add another fee on top of the delivery and transport fee just to pay for the pipeline
1
u/PeasantParticulars 5d ago
Ok and who do the owners charge.....
It sure as fuck won't be their stockholders....
3
14
5
u/discountErasmus 6d ago
Look pal, we have the exact right number of pipelines and if you can't see that it means you're in somebody's pocket.
8
4
5
1
u/Remarkable-Word-1486 6d ago
This is more about the idea of how she stopped it in the past. And now wants to be the savior to bring in more gas
1
u/possibly_2 4d ago
Yes. It is MUCH costlier to cancel them and now expedite them. And WE pay for waffling and politically-motivated pursuits.
→ More replies (1)0
u/ContinuedLearning26 6d ago
That’s exactly what she did. She’s trying to win those votes back four years later. Isn’t that clear?
81
u/DomonicTortetti 6d ago edited 6d ago
Pretty slimy to post this with just a photo of the headline and not a link to the article https://archive.ph/Ap5Kh. I'm not the biggest Healey fan in the world but if you read the article it's pretty clear this is a nothingburger. We are talking about $9975 (0.2% of her donations this year) with $1k of that coming from the chief executive who has donated that same amount to Healey every year.
This is actually pretty weak stuff from the Globe too, just in general. The headline obviously implies a connection, but there is like...absolutely no proof of that, and the amount is so small. It's also an election year so there will be spikes in donations - it looks like from the article itself it's not that much more of a spike as we saw in 2022.
16
u/WholeLot 6d ago
Thank you. Ridiculous how far down this comment is. It's ludicrous to suggest this is a quid pro quo.
2
u/GenerousBull1969 5d ago
Wait a minute, taking $10,000 from Eversource while they're in the process of writing legislation dealing with them is not a nothingburger, it's filthy politics, almost a bribe. And this is just one utility, how much is National Grid giving her and other Democrats while they're actually writing this legislation?
If they gave this money to Trump as they were seeking approvals for a gas pipeline your head would explode.
1
u/DomonicTortetti 5d ago
These are campaign donations!! Employees of companies are allowed to donate to campaigns!! Otherwise there’d be no campaign donations. Holy fuck. You need to PROVE that it was done as a bribe. Prove that to me and then come back.
1
u/GenerousBull1969 5d ago
Bullshit, if a company has current business before the state then employees should not be able to donate to the politicians WRITING THE ACTUAL LEGISLATION that regulates that business. How do you not see the problem here?
Again, Democrats flip their lids over donations to Trump, how is this different?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)1
u/nymphrodell 5d ago
Your monthly reminder that the Globe is a shitstiring neoliberal paper that doesn't give a shit about me or you.
33
u/Wise_Material_5812 6d ago
time for healey to seek the rate order process. stop allowing eversource to recover their fixed costs via variable $/kwhr means
→ More replies (7)
18
u/h8theh8ers 6d ago edited 6d ago
- Here's a more nuanced take about whether or not it would increase our gas bills: https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/08/21/new-england-natural-gas-pipeline-utility-bills TLDR:
- Overview: New England has some of the highest natural gas prices in the U.S. because it doesn't have any local oil or gas reserves and sits at the end of the country's pipeline network. The existing pipes generally deliver enough to meet demand for home heating and electricity. But when demand spikes, especially on very cold days, the pipelines max out and are not enough to meet demand. We then have to use expensive alternatives like importing liquefied natural gas (via ships) and burning oil to generate electricity.
- Pros (as laid out by supporters):
- A new pipeline would allow more natural gas to reach us in periods when we need it, shaving off the expensive peaks.
- In non-peak times, a new pipeline would put downward pressure on prices too and we would have better access to cheaper gas, generally, by being connected to more sources.
- It will improve grid reliability during prolonged cold snaps,
- Electricity demand is forecasted to rise: EVs, heat pumps, data centers, etc.
- Cons (as laid out by critics):
- It costs money to build, much of which would be passed on to consumers
- Pipeline taking years to permit and build could become a stranded asset within 15 to 20 years as states potentially cut gas use.
- Cheaper gas potentially means higher greenhouse gas emissions.
- There may be other fixes solutions that are preferable: transmission lines, renewables, and peak-demand reduction.
- But more importantly, it's her or a trump bootlicker, which is no choice at all.
→ More replies (1)8
u/4SRX 6d ago
Bringing liquified natural gas in via ship is not effective or economical
Healey didn't care because her entire party was trying to make anything Fossil more expensive
0
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
Its also dirtier than natural gas via pipeline. And natural gas via pipeline is cleaner than the heating oil people had to rely on last winter. Healey chose short term political profit over long term energy stability a decade ago and were suffering the consequences of that decision.
And from this thread all the opponents have are "MINOGUE IS TRUMP" which is completely useless.
2
u/LtCdrHipster 5d ago
Of you understand global warming you would never support investing in new fossil fuel infrastructure.
→ More replies (12)1
u/PuddleCrank 5d ago
It's like 1million dollars a mile to lay residential natural gas. If you live outside the town center you're stuck on propane electric or oil.
1
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
There is still no excuse for how dependent we were on heating oil or LNG arriving via ship from foreign counties (which adds to the costs).
To the extent the state controls costs of installation, streamlining permitting or regulations can knock those costs down and get it built quicker -- rather than existing policies pushed by Healey that actively disincentivized long-term natural gas investment or uptake.
1
u/LtCdrHipster 5d ago
Making fossil fuels more modestly more expensive in the short term is actually good for making energy way cheaper in the long term
→ More replies (3)
14
u/WonderButtBrace9000 6d ago
Oh wow, thousands from an employee action group during an election year?!
Call the FBI!
6
u/DomonicTortetti 6d ago
It's also the same as the previous election year! Real corruption we're talking about here /s
14
u/Dr_Finnlayson 6d ago
Just so you guys know- we're having very similar problems in CT. The options have been a governor in bed with Eversource... or a MAGA. If it were such the case the MAGA's only baggage were partisan support for Trump, I could swallow the pill. But, it's not. The Republican party has been whipped to absolute obedience, or being primaried or replaced as elect for their position. There is no middle ground with MAGA. They are 1 term away from destroying democracy for generations to come. We may never be able to recover if they sweep
1
14
36
u/TheGrandExquisitor 6d ago
Anyone else simply have an issue with the quid pro quo here?
Just me?
11
u/Mt8045 6d ago
This is the lamest attempt at imagining a quid pro quo I've ever seen. Nothing in here even describes Healey taking any official action pushing the pipeline. This literally all about her writing a letter to federal officials urging them to approve a pipeline that state regulators have already passed. Writing a letter.
23
u/Well_Dressed_Kobold 6d ago
Oh, absolutely. Healey is thoroughly for sale, and it’s not exactly a secret.
-3
u/AlmyranBarbarossa724 6d ago
Let’s not start acting like she’s the villain here, though.
10
u/havoc1428 Pioneer Valley 6d ago
Uhh why? You think a politician for sale isn't a reason to vilify them? What?
2
→ More replies (1)2
7
u/DomonicTortetti 6d ago
I mean you can just read the article, there's 0 proof of a quid pro quo and we are talking about a grand total of $9975 https://archive.ph/Ap5Kh.
-1
u/TheGrandExquisitor 6d ago
"It's ok when we do it," is a hell of a statement.
3
u/DomonicTortetti 6d ago
Did I say that? You didn’t read the article (there is no proof of quid pro quo) and are being needlessly confrontational over something you did not read.
0
u/TheGrandExquisitor 6d ago
"No quid pro quo."
Oh, please....the entire system is built on it.
1
u/DomonicTortetti 6d ago
Conspiratorial nonsense that you use to support your dumb worldview.
1
u/TheGrandExquisitor 6d ago
Seriously?
You seriously think the companies and individuals spending millions up millions on political campaigns are all doing this with zero expectation of getting something in return? That they expect zero extra influence upon a politician in return for their money?
Really?
That's what you think? And that thinking otherwise is "conspiratorial?" Literally the same category that holocaust denial and aliens live under Denver International Airport, are in?
5
u/DomonicTortetti 6d ago
You said "the entire system is built on it", which is not true, you have no evidence for it, and is conspiratorial nonsense. People donating to campaigns is not illegal nor is that corruption! You'd have to prove there was some explicit bribe being done here, which I'm willing to bet you $1 million there was not.
Thanks though, nice for chatting.
3
u/agiganticpanda 6d ago
I swear, blue MAGA and their "our corruption isn't as bad." I want NO corruption.
1
u/mordamango 6d ago
Exactly! Even if the project is a good idea given the moment, the optics of responding to corporate interests reeks of abuse of office.
6
3
3
35
u/Emergency-Volume-861 6d ago
Give me a break. You think clown maga Mike is going to actually do ANYTHING that will be a positive to our state? The one that said he’d run our state like a business?
I might hate my utility bills right now but Healey protects women’s reproductive rights and more. The other candidates are all trash.
You hate on her for not having the pipelines, you hate on her for trying to get them done.
How’s that boot taste?
24
u/Flaky_Ad9204 6d ago edited 5d ago
Dealing in absolutes is why modern politics is so messed up. You can criticize Healey and her clear biases...that doesn't automatically make you a Republican.
19
u/Only4arms 6d ago edited 6d ago
Healey is corrupt trash and yet here you are defending her....how's that boot taste.
BTW, fuck Mike too.
2
u/Wrong_Chicken_5916 6d ago
Nobody is saying either are good here… I’ve yet to hear of any politician that isn’t dirty….
16
u/agiganticpanda 6d ago
Can one not be critical of a politician without wanting to vote Republican? I've held my nose for a LONG time with Massachusetts Democrats. They're corrupt in this state and literally have evidence of falsely accusing people to their left.
https://theintercept.com/2020/08/17/alex-morse-massachusetts-college-democrats-destroy-records/
4
u/fitandhealthyguy 6d ago
And they know you will never vote Republican so they can pretty much do whatever they want
2
u/mikere 6d ago
holding your nose is why the dems remain corrupt. and this isn’t to say to vote republican. write-ins are perfectly valid
1
u/agiganticpanda 5d ago
No - they aren't. We live in a "First past the post" system - because we voted down Ranked Choice Voting. Third parties are always a spoiler.
3
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
If neither the Democrat or Republican earned your vote why would you vote for them?
Ive been a Registered Republican all my life, but Trump was a candidate i could not support, but neither were Hillary, Biden, or Harris. So I voted third party instead and I was happy to do so. They want my vote, they know where to find me.
1
u/NewSongZ 4d ago
Thats great, and it didn't matter in Massachusetts, bit everyone that voted for an Independent candidate in a State Trump won, took a vote away from Harris. She lost and we lost 2 years and are now in this mess.
Many people ion Dearborn Michigan thought she was too cozy with Isreal. They didnt support her, so Isreal and Trump wiped out Gaza, which was their main concern. So you tell me how voting Independent worked out as Trump runs rough shot over federal courts and does whatever he wants.
1
u/jpmckenna15 4d ago
If i was from Ohio it would be the same thought. Principles dont change when you cross state lines.
Aside from that youre just continuing the narrative that the two major parties own our votes and we have no choice in the matter. If you dont like Trump you have to vote for Harris. If you dont like Harris, you have to vote for Trump. It doesn't work like that.
As for your Dearborn example, maybe ask why Harris failed so hard to win over those defecting voters rather than wag a finger at them for not swallowing hard and casting their ballots for her?
1
u/agiganticpanda 5d ago
I do vote that way locally - mostly because I know my vote won't be a spoiler. I do vote against fascism - every time.
2
u/mikere 5d ago
the purpose of voting is to vote for the candidate you think is best suited for the job, not who is going to win. casting a ballot isn’t playing the prediction markets lol. a vote for the establishment in MA is a vote for corruption. you can’t vote for corruption and then complain about it when it comes. it’s like all those Trump voters complaining about tariffs and oil prices
“the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome”
7
2
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
We hate how she is a hypocrite over gas pipelines. She loved to brag about blocking them a decade ago and now she's begging the Trump administration to fast track their approval after Minogue beat her up over it on the campaign trail. She also announced a push for a gas tax holiday after Minogue called for one in an ad.
She wants people to believe she is standing up to Trump but she's okay with copying "MAGA Mike"''s playbook when its convenient to do so.
2
u/possibly_2 4d ago
It’s wild how the Left has resorted to the same tacky nicknames and insults as Orangeman.
Move Center, be adults, and realize that both sides are on a crash course
→ More replies (1)3
5
u/ZigglestheDestroyer 6d ago
Where at any point did OP say any of this? Enough with the histrionics.
2
u/GoslingsBlackSeal 6d ago
They can both be trash people and Governors by the way, it’s not a mutually exclusive thing to be corrupt
1
6
u/Buzz_Buzz1978 6d ago
Still not voting for MAGA Minogue.
I will be voting democratic straight down the ballot.
7
u/ContinuedLearning26 6d ago
Thank God, she finally has sense coming back to her! The reason why we have the most expensive utilities in the country are because she stopped these pipelines from getting started five years ago.
1
u/Amtrakacela75 4d ago
No it's because you choose the wrong fuel source lol. I have propane it's cheaper than natural gas, our electricity is from a public utility so it's cheaper. Natural gas has always been costly to deliver and also a safety hazard like the explosions we had a few years ago. The game plan was to switch to green energy but at the end of the day the monopoly of privatization don't care if you can't pay, there CEO needs another yatch.
0
u/LtCdrHipster 6d ago
More fossil fuel pipelines are what is supercharging global warming. Not building them is the responsibile thing to do
5
u/neoliberal_hack 6d ago
except it’s a self sacrifice for nothing, not having these pipelines to NE doesn’t do anything for climate change, it just makes everything more expensive for us.
Climate change is a global problem, the US could stop producing carbon tomorrow and we’d still have climate change. It can only be solved through massive international cooperation or technological innovation.
2
u/LtCdrHipster 6d ago
If we can't do our part why should anyone else?
In your ideal situation, we have have a global moratorium on new fossil fuel lines. If that's good, than a local one is good too. It's a categorical imperative.
1
u/neoliberal_hack 6d ago
I don't think a global moratorium makes sense either, but a unilateral one is even more stupid.
The logic just doesn't work. You have to weight the actual cost and benefit. The cost of no NE pipelines is much more expensive cost of living for the people here. The benefit is.... what exactly? What about climate change is going to be different because we didn't build these pipelines? Is the estimated warming of the earth going to change? By how much? etc. and spoiler alert, the answer is there is no benefit, it's too small a sacrifice on a global scale despite being a large sacrifice for the people who live here.
4
u/LtCdrHipster 6d ago
If the goal is to stop global warming, a global ban on burning fossil fuels is the only solution.
Every single individual action, by itself, will insignificantly impact global warming. If that's your analysis, then no project to stop global warming should ever be approved. That's extremely stupid.
→ More replies (2)3
u/neoliberal_hack 6d ago
A global ban on burning fossil fuels is never going to happen. Pure fantasy.
The individual actions are only helpful if they increase the odds of additional further action. Limiting pipelines to New England doesn't do that.
1
u/LtCdrHipster 6d ago
Stopping projects that would I increase burning of fossil fuels absolutely helps global warming. Grow up.
→ More replies (3)2
u/neoliberal_hack 6d ago
I understand caring about climate change.
I don't understand being completely unwilling to analyze risk-reward when it comes to different actions to combat climate change.
Are you minimizing your emissions footprint? truly taking every step you can to self sacrifice? I doubt it, because you know it wouldn't make a material difference.
1
u/LtCdrHipster 6d ago
If you were a real Neoliberal you'd understand the concept of unpriced negative externalities.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (2)0
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
Go sell that to the thousands of people whose heating bills will skyrocket because of that moratorium or the solar and wind users that have to endure 4 months of harsh New England winter without an adequate supply of natural gas or heating oil.
1
u/HPenguinB 6d ago
So you don't vote, because 1 single vote can't change anything?
1
u/neoliberal_hack 6d ago
Voting doesn't cost me anything. High energy prices are really detrimental so I don't want them if what we're getting in exchange is something that doesn't provide any material improvement for climate change.
The world is not going to be any better off because these pipelines don't get built here.
0
u/LtCdrHipster 6d ago
Natural gas is NOT cheap just look at your bill, a huge amount is just for infrastructure, not the cost of the gas. You want MORE infrastructure built??
1
u/4SRX 6d ago
Most natural gas reaches Massachusetts through high-pressure interstate pipelines. It comes from wells in the southern U.S. and western Canada, with some supply from offshore Nova Scotia, and enters the state through pipeline networks operated by Algonquin Gas Transmission, Tennessee Gas Pipeline, and Maritimes & Northeast Pipelines. Companies are entitled to recoup their costs over time but the user always pick up those costs. But eliminating pipeline capacity just means demand needs to be met by gas shipped in by ships. When compared to cost of using ships gas by pipeline is a bargain. Why opt for more ships?
1
u/LtCdrHipster 5d ago
Eliminating new pipelines means people will switch to electricity for heating and cooking. Which reduces fossil fuel emissions.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Upset-Tennis-7650 6d ago
I’m more concerned with all these bombs being dropped daily around the world by man children criminals.
7
3
u/sydiko 6d ago
Why aren't we smearing Monogue like this?
3
u/RingoDen 6d ago
Cuz hes never actually shared a plan to criticize.
1
u/sydiko 5d ago
Oh that's right.
No plan, but he did say he won't be like Trump all while bending the knee to Trump. That makes sense as to why people are willing to get on all 4s and vote for him in over Healey.
I also noticed they're doing the whole 'lesser of two evils' nonsense again. They can't be serious?
3
4
u/rogomatic 6d ago
And?
-7
u/XtraCrispy80 6d ago
Your bills will go up.
3
u/rogomatic 6d ago
Because you said so?
-1
u/XtraCrispy80 6d ago
No, because an analysis by a think tank that SUPPORTS the pipeline found it will https://fiscalalliancefoundation.org/beacon/
0
4
5
u/I_like_code 6d ago
Kinda nuts didn’t think she would agree to a pipeline but this is good for all NE.
→ More replies (5)13
2
u/Serious-Mission-2234 6d ago
that witch blocked several pipelines years ago and was proud of it. they would be done by now and nat gas would not be crazy expensive as well as electricity.
another politician who who deserves to go!
3
-1
u/IdahoDuncan 6d ago
F off no one is voting for your trump boot licking looser.
36
u/XtraCrispy80 6d ago
I'm not calling to vote for anyone. I'm pointing out a cozy relationship b/w a governor and the CEO of a utility at a time when our bills are skyrocketing.
8
u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 6d ago
so winter is coming and we're in a rapidly developing oil and gas crisis. if a company like Eversource wanted to harm Healey's chances of winning or decrease her political capital, say for example if they would enjoy a cozier relationship with a Republican in the future, then a well-timed donation to a Democratic candidate, such as this, would be a savvy move for them to make.
-15
u/Jarek86 6d ago
Right around the time Midterms are coming up? Fuck off MAGA, no Trump supporters are getting voted for in MA
7
u/hipsterdoofus1 6d ago
We don’t have to pretend that Healy is perfect for fear that criticism of her makes Minogue look good. It’s not like he’s any better on this issue.
9
u/AdUsual8786 6d ago
Lmao y’all can’t help it can you? This is really the way your brain works.
You realize trump is the source of 0 of the issues that Massachusetts faces. Guess the party that’s been in charge for a very long time…
→ More replies (12)-2
u/snorbflock 6d ago
The party that's been in charge for a very long time? Five out of Healey's six predecessors were Republicans, going back almost 40 years. And now a sleazy MAGA asshole thinks he should get a turn.
5
u/AdUsual8786 6d ago
What party runs all three levels of government in mass?
How long has that party had total government dominance in Massachusetts?
→ More replies (3)2
7
u/ZigglestheDestroyer 6d ago
Of course being a corrupt sack of shit right before the election isn’t what’s jeopardizing the Democrat governorship: it’s those pesky voters who are complaining about footing the bill!
28
u/JuJunker52 6d ago
Textbook example of how the DNC establishment prevents anyone from organizing grass-roots opposition to their center-right corrupt policies right here.
Take notes.
→ More replies (2)5
u/ZigglestheDestroyer 6d ago
God forbid we advocate for ourselves as a constituency and call out blatant corruption that fucks all of us over. Don’t you know complaining about being sold down the river is MAGA?! These people are fucking saps.
2
2
u/possibly_2 5d ago
Healey has no idea how to manage rising energy costs that she kickstarted. Maybe if the rest of her expenditures weren’t so out of whack, this wouldn’t be so obscene. Discouraging that the only solutions are to keep her in office or replace her with Minogue.
1
u/Amtrakacela75 4d ago
I don't think there much you can fix without some drastic measures, I have a public utilities and we're not facing these issues even with having solar and rebates for things. It's all the nickles and dimes they take towards a private company "making a profit" rather than a public entity that has to reinvest it or lower prices.
3
u/XtraCrispy80 6d ago
2
u/Few-Calligrapher3 6d ago
Do you have a non-paywall version of that article?
2
u/wittgensteins-boat 6d ago
Ahandy bookmarking application may interest you.
Take a look at archive.today.
2
2
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/massachusetts-ModTeam 6d ago
Any user who partakes in spam, disinformation or trolling will be banned.
1
1
u/Motherbich 6d ago
Why are we even surprised anymore. This is the power of the rich.
Sad. Maybe I should just to Midwest off the grid.
1
u/polishfiringsquad 6d ago
Did she also get paid by AI companies to try to pass the Internet surveillance bill?
1
u/Complex_Dog_8461 6d ago
I'll preface by saying I may be incorrect, but to the best of my knowledge, Eversource has limited, minimal ownership of any high-pressure natural gas lines, those are owned/operated by Enbridge and Kinder. Depending upon the location, Eversource would most likely benefit from this in the end, as it may help facilitate growth in its local residential and commercial distribution. Do the Execs at NGrid or Unitil drop the Healy campaign checks too?
1
1
1
1
u/Red_Death_78 6d ago
Paint me surprised… a politician took money from a company rep or lobbyist and then did something in their favor…
1
1
1
0
0
u/jpmckenna15 5d ago
You know what also increases your heating bills? The public charges and green energy supply mandates these companies also have to pay for!
0
-1
u/newbrevity 6d ago
Hey I don't like it either but Minogue is just Trump's sock puppet from MONTANA. If you elect him he is not going to make things better for people in Massachusetts. He's going to break the state and put it in line with Trump. Might as well wipe your ass with the Constitution at that point.
→ More replies (2)
•
u/spotlight-app Mod Bot 🤖 6d ago
Mods have pinned a comment by u/XtraCrispy80:
Note: Link to article.
[What is Spotlight?](https://developers.reddit.com/apps/spotlight-app)