Frank Bellotti will win this one big. But his Republican opponent is making hay while the sun shines, with charges that Bellotti has gone easy on the state's biggest political scandal and that Bellotti may even be implicated.

The Attorney General's post has historically been a favorite of Massachusetts politicians who have an eye to the future, and this year is no different. Incumbent Francis X. Bellotti needs to win again to remain a viable force in state politics and to keep alive prospects for a shot for the governorship in the next election. William F. Weld '66, the young Republican challenger, is making his debut in state politics, and a victory or strong showing could be a stepping stone for an illustrious political career. Bellotti and Weld seem to be running not so much out of love for the particular office, but because while serving as Attorney General they can wield considerable influence and make or maintain valuable connections.

Bellotti, a former lieutenant governor (under Foster Furcolo) and narrowly-defeated Democratic nominee for governor in 1964, has spent thousands on media advertisements that are carefully written to avoid concrete issues and to concentrate on Bellotti's personal image. With great name recognition throughout the state and a wide lead, substantive debate on issues can only hurt Bellotti and aid his challenger. Bellotti has consistently refused to debate Weld. In the meantime, Weld travels around the state hammering on the issue of political corruption and trying to slow the momentum of Bellotti's long career in Massachusetts politics. Weld's chances are slight, and a Bellotti defeat would come as an astounding upset.

In response to Bellotti's phantom campaign, Weld emphasizes a handful of incriminating facts that indicate that Bellotti has not pursued cases of political corruption vigorously enough. Most damaging of all is Weld's insinuation that Bellotti was connected with a firm recently proven to have bribed state politicans in return for lucrative public works construction contracts.

In all his speeches, Weld points out some embarrassing facts concerning Bellotti: Bellotti was hired just prior to his race for Attorney General in 1974 by PCM, Inc. as an attorney. PCM was headed by Daniel Shields and William Harding, former executives of MBM, Inc., a firm from which two state senators, who are now serving jail terms, extorted bribes.

The Essex County commissioners entered into a contract with PCM in 1974 for the company to supervise about $10 million worth of county construction work. Although Bellotti claims to have advised PCM only on strictly legal matters, witnesses claim that Bellotti personally lobbied Essex County commissioners to persuade them to make a contract with PCM. According to investigative news stories, although PCM had only been incorporated the previous month, Bellotti praised the PCM firm at a February 5, 1974 meeting of the Essex Country commissioners, saying the PCM firm was "the most informed and efficient in their entire field."

In 1976 when the MBM scandal broke, it wasn't long before Bellotti's connection to MBM through PCM surfaced. A federal prosecutor handled the initial investigation and a federal court prosecuted two state senators, but then the federal prosecutor handed the information on the case over to Bellotti's office. Since that time, Bellotti has done little to further the investigation.

While Bellotti has failed to take action, the statute of limitations is expiring on some of the alleged offenses of MBM executives. In light of the MBM scandal, legislation was finally proposed to create a special commission to investigate fraud and corruption in the award of state and county building contracts over the past ten years. Bellotti supported this legislation, but wanted the scope of the investigation narrowed to include only contracts involving MBM and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts--which, of course, would keep the Essex County commissioners out of it.

Weld continues to criticizes Bellotti's recalcitrance in investigating the MBM-PCM scandal, contending that "I personally do not think the whole story has come out yet...My point is that enough facts have come out already to suggest that the PCM deal in Essex County was part of a pattern."

In the meantime, Bellotti remains silent. A scrappy veteran of past political wars, he's shedding Weld's accusations like a duck sheds water. He has labeled many of Weld's claims as lies, and accuses Weld of running a smear campaign against him. Unfortunately for Bellotti, the facts support Weld. Weld has been careful to stress the factual, verifiable basis for his broader insinuation that Bellotti is not tough enough on white-collar crime and political corruption. So far, Bellotti has yet to change his tactics. However, Weld is making an impact. Newspapers across the state have been listening to Weld, and some papers have published editorials calling on Bellotti to respond to Weld's challenges.

The nexus between Bellotti, PCM and MBM appears to have been thicker all the time. Bellotti, after he was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1962, created four administrative assistant positions in his office, one of which was filled by Daniel Burke, who was one of three Essex County commissioners. In turn, Burke was acquainted with William Harding, one of the PCM officials, on a social basis before the Essex County contract was awarded to PCM, which at that time had no professional employees.

Even more mysterious is the sudden reversal of the stand that the State Bureau of Building Construction (BBC) took on the Essex County contract with PCM. Essex County newspapers reported that a BBC official advised all three County Commissioners that BBC was opposed to the hiring of PCM to manage the county's public works construction. In fact, the newspapers reported, a letter to that effect was written and prepared to be sent to the commissioners. However, for some reason the letters were never sent. About one month later, the BBC instead sent a letter saying there was no conflict with the BBC in the county's hiring a construction management company such as PCM, and that the BBC was "willing to cooperate and work in concert with the group selected." No one knows the reason for this sudden reversal of decision.

Weld keeps pounding away. He crisscrosses the state recounting the facts of the PCM case to voters and asking them to consider why Bellotti has shown such signs of hesitancy to investigate the case. Bellotti says that he cannot investigate the case of a former client, yet refuses to appoint a special prosecutor. In the meantime, the blue ribbon commission formed to investigate the affair crawls along at a snail's pace and the statute of limitations harbors more and more potential white-collar criminals.

In a way, the cloud of alleged corruption that is now hovering over Bellotti carries a tragic irony. Bellotti, in his 1964 narrow loss to former Governor John A. Volpe, was the victim of vicious and apparently false innuendos concerning his ties to the underworld. The defeat for governor, which came when Bellotti was only 41 years old, marked the turning point of a meteoric rise to power in Massachusetts politics.

After that loss, Bellotti lost the Attorney General's race in 1966 to Elliot L. Richardson '41 and ran a poor third in another race for the governorship. However, Bellotti would not quit campaigning. It was his life. He talked to local clubs and groups, he shook more hands and remembered people's names. His comeback has been impressive; a recent poll ranked him as the second most popular Democrat in the state, following Sen. Edward M. Kennedy '54. Now, the PCM scandals and what Weld has made of it threaten to wipe away his monumental effort to ressurrect himself.