Some claim that the change would make bona fide issues a real part of future campaigns. Deprived of the facility of personally cultivating his own small nitch of support, the politician would have to go beyond handclasping and backslapping. Yet, it can be argued that Cambridge is not all that big, that politicians are probably capable of merely expanding their personality-based campaigns, and that, even if some rudimentary issues do develop, they will be more coverups for private factional squabbles.
Perhaps a more important question is which of the City's two major political powers will gain from the change. Currently, the City Council and school committee are almost equally divided between candidates endorsed by the Cambridge Civic Association and the so-called independents. (The independents hold a 5-4 majority on the Council; elected members of the school committee are split 3-3, chairs the committee and throws the majority to the CCA.)
The CCA is opposing the change with every resource at its command--a good indication that supporters of the civic association feel they have a great deal to lose if PR is tossed out. A look at recent voting figures tells why. The bulwark of the CCA's support lies in Wards 7 and 8--the Brattle Street area--and in city elections, CCA candidates poll only about 40 to 45 per cent of the total vote. With PR, that's good enough to elect respectable delegations to both the Council and the school committee. Under a plurality, only the strongest of CCA candidates might survive (Crane, who has city-wide support, for example), but those relying exclusively on CCA endorsement might be overwhelmed by the independent majorities.
Swear Word
In many parts of the City, the CCA's image is terrible--and "CCA" itself is probably a swear word. This is a reflection of antipathy between rich and poor, tension between the two large universities--and those associated with them--and the rest of the City. So bad, in fact, is the CCA's image that many politicians will not accept the association's endorsement because they believe it would be political suicide to do so. One present Councillor, Bernard Goldberg, first ran with CCA endorsement and lost; in the next election, he declined endorsement and won. If campaigns became truly city-wide, as they would under plurality, many observers believe the CCA would have trouble finding candidates able to cultivate a broad base of support.
Another worry for the CCA is the primary. CCA partisans may be less likely to turn out for these seemingly insignificant preliminary local elections than supporters of the independents. If that turned out to be true, some of the CCA candidates might have a hard time making it on the ballot in November.
Lack of Unity
Yet, as bad off as the CCA seems to be, the independents on the Council are not without problems. Most of them don't relish the prospect of plurality. Their comfortable mathematical majorities, which look so convincing on paper, fail to reflect their chief problem: lack of unity. Each independent's quest for votes is an individual matter; he is competing against other independents more than he is working with them. PR, favoring minority votes as it does, encourages this division. But the independents are not only split by the system, but also by temperament, background, and political philosophy.
The nub of the situation is this: the CCA possesses the financial and political organization (and unity) necessary for city-wide campaigns, but lacks a broad base of popular support. The independents apparently possess the broad base of support, but lack the unified organization. If the independents can unify rapidly, the CCA will get clobbered. If they can't, a whole range of unpredictable possibilities appear.
One independent, Councillor Walter J. Sullivan, has the potential power to create some semblance of order out of the disorganized ranks of the independents. Sullivan is from an old political family, has good political instincts, and inherits a hard core of workers loyal to his cause. His background is Irish Catholic, and he eats, sleeps, drinks, and prays politics. He avoids antagonizing anyone and gets along even with his political enemies. Walk out in the street someday with Sullivan; he knows everyone by his first name.
Unlike many of the other independents, Sullivan's search for votes has always been a city-wide effort. Irish Catholics are the largest voting bloc in Cambridge, and, with Sullivan's ability, some sort of powerful voting slate might be developed.
CCA May Benefit
That's one possibility. But the fact is, that no one will really confidently predict what will happen if PR is abandoned. Many independent elements might tend to go their own way out of pure self-interest or distrust for Sullivan.
Some other observers even suggest that the CCA would benefit from the change CCA candidates would no longer have to compete against each other for "number one votes" in the Brattle Street wards. Given added time to campaign in other parts of the City, the CCA's more unified front and greater financial backing could make for substantial gains.
If PR is abandoned party politics