Oh dear. They’re talking about it again. Congestion pricing, as the Globe’s Jon Chesto reports. … I have nothing against congestion pricing per se – if it’s really about relieving traffic congestion. But when lawmakers start talking about “revenue streams” and “pilot programs,” my metro-west instinct senses what’s coming: sticking it to Mass. Turnpike drivers yet again and leaving out tolls on I-93, Route 1 and Route 2 etc. And once up and running the so-called pilot program would become a permanent program with future tolls adjusted to meet the T’s revenues needs, not congestion levels. … Gov. Baker was right to veto the last congestion pricing proposal that lawmakers passed, citing “equity” concerns and other problems.

Maybe someone should ask Gov. Healey her thoughts on congestion pricing amid all the current talk about “affordability”? Might as well ask GOP gubernatorial candidates as well, right? And what about Mayor Wu? I’m pretty sure owners of Boston’s struggling office towers might have an opinion or two as well.

Re NYC’s suspended congestion program: they actually had a rather robust traffic relief plan in place when it was briefly implemented. They wanted to raise money, sure. But they were also serious about reducing traffic in downtown Manhattan. I don’t see that same seriousness in Boston. Proponents here are more focused on the money, not the traffic.

Update — 12.1.25 — There’s a lot of great comments/suggestions on congestion pricing at Universal Hub, which picked up my post a few days ago.

The Massachusetts Republican Party is going through yet another of its meltdowns, as the Herald’s Joe Battenfeld and Contrarian Boston’s Scott Van Voorhis report. How bad is it? The state GOP had only $15,000 in its campaign coffers as of the end of October, as Scott notes. That’s roughly the value of three used Chevy Aveos. Can the party ever right itself? Well, it hasn’t righted itself for more than a generation now. In fact, the party has actually contracted the more it’s tried to expand. Only 8.3 percent of the state’s registered voters now call themselves Republican.  But here’s the thing: Democrats may control every major elected office in Massachusetts, but only 25.7 of state voters call themselves Democrats. There’s something going on here besides Mass. GOP incompetence and Mass. Dem dominance by default.

That brings me to Indrees Kahloon’s new piece in the Atlantic “Political Parties Have Disconnected from the Public.” Read it. I found this quote from the late Irish political scientist Peter Mair, author of Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democray, particularly spot on:

“The age of party democracy has passed. Although the parties themselves remain, they have become so disconnected from the wider society, and pursue a form of competition that is so lacking in meaning, that they no longer seem capable of sustaining democracy in its present form.”

Sound familiar? … 

— Booming Framingham? “New development firm launches first big apartment project west of Boston” (BBJ)

— The city has tackled zoning reforms. Now it needs to tackle this: “Cambridge ranks last among 500 US cities for project permitting red tape” (BBJ)

— Massachusetts is a surprising outlier when it comes to its consent laws: “Students Accused a Teacher of Sexual Abuse. Prosecutors Say They Can’t Charge Him” (NYT)

— Turkey & Stuffing and Creamed Corn Oreos?  “I ate Thanksgiving Oreos so you don’t have to, with the worst flavor I’ve ever had” (MassLive)

— At Hub Blog, we like angry centrism: “This rising House Democrat is a voice for the angry middle” (Washington Post)

— Right under their noses: “‘Cocaine bust tied to governor’s aide suggests well-oiled operation, experts say” (Boston Globe)

— It sounds like something out of a National Geographic documentary on lost ancient cities: “Taps run dry as water crisis forces Iran to consider evacuating its capital” (NBC News)

— Mayoral Higher Office Alert: “Michelle Wu’s trip to Canada was inescapably political as she played diplomat in Nova Scotia” (Boston Globe)

— It’s sick, but he’s not the first American titan whose wealth has exceeded huge swaths of the population: “Elon Musk is set to make more than every U.S. elementary teacher combined” (Washington Post)

— The sorrows of Fernald know no end: “He Died at a School for Disabled People. Decades Later, His Brother Sought Answers” (NYT)

— Speaking of the medical establishment’s past and present inadequate responses to the disabled: “Millions of Kids Are on ADHD Pills. For Many, It’s the Start of a Drug Cascade” (WSJ)

— I’ll admit it: I’m fascinated with all things SharkNinja: “SharkNinja partners with Boston University to launch AI and analytics lab” (BBJ)

— You don’t say: “How Crypto Could Trigger the Next Financial Crisis”

As debate heats up over a likely rent-control measure on next year’s statewide ballot, I thought I might as well put a plug in for my new favorite idea to help ease the state’s housing crisis. Here goes: Why not “duplexes by right”? Massachusetts now has Accessory Dwelling Units by right. Why not extend that concept to include duplexes? If anything, duplexes are arguably better, from both aesthetic and affordability standpoints, than ADUs. If done right, duplexes can blend right into a neighborhood and mostly eliminate the “loss of character” argument many NIMBY types reflexively deploy when opposing new housing in their communities. (See photo above of a ‘stacked’ duplex, as opposed to a horizontal duplex.) … This  idea has been bugging me since I recently posted about the city of Manchester’s new zoning-reform proposals, which include making it easier to build duplexes in most single-family districts. Granted, some NIMBY types will oppose any new housing, but, as officials in Manchester discovered via extensive homeowner surveys, most people don’t mind duplexes as much as they do larger multifamily complexes. … Anyway, that’s my Hub Blog policy-wonk suggestion of the day.

Fyi: A number of towns in Massachusetts already have, or are mulling, various duplex-related zoning rules, beyond ADU and  MBTA Communities Act requirements. But there’s no statewide “duplex by right” law. … Laura M. Moynihan, executive director at the Falmouth Housing Trust Inc., has a good explainer piece on the benefits of duplexes, as Falmouth considers its own zoning changes.

Fyi II – Definitely check out Scott Van Voorhis’s Contrarian Boston post this morning on the little-known referendum initiative that would make it easier to build, via lot-size changes, smaller starter homes in Massachusetts. 

Opponents of rent control are going to have their hands full if the controversial initiative gets on the statewide ballot next year, as supporters say is now likely. Why? Because the rent-control proposal currently being pushed, as the Globe reports, may resonate with a lot of voters at a time when most everyone is steaming over rising prices and privileged yuppies are clenching their revolutionary fists in support of fellow college grads embracing lunatic 160-year-old policy ideas. …

So what are Beacon Hill Democrats going to do next year when this extreme rent-control initiative likely lands on their desks? It’s not going to be as easily punted as Michelle Wu’s rent-control plan a few sessions ago. This latest proposal applies to every town and city in the commonwealth, not just Boston. Lawmakers are going to have a lot of constituents interested in this bill, from Pittsfield to Provincetown. … Interestingly, Wu doesn’t like the current statewide proposal, as GBH reports. She thinks it’s too one-size-fits-all restrictive and might stunt new housing construction. And that’s from Michelle Wu, not some laissez-faire fanatic. She does have her pragmatic side, don’t forget.

Speaking of new construction and rents, via Banker & Tradesman: “Boston Apartment Rent Hikes Plateau After New Deliveries.” … Gee. Who would have thought? A supply-and-demand solution to the housing crisis. 

Update – As I was saying about Democrats, via Commonwealth Beacon: “‘They’re making a huge bet’: Rent control referendum splits progressives.”

Exhibit A why Elizabeth Warren was right to call out Larry Summers over his emails with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein: This Harvard Crimson story. Check it out. Summers was basically asking a known sex predator how to seduce a “mentee,” i.e. a younger woman he was effectively mentoring. Epstein’s advice is chilling. … Warren is right: Summers doesn’t belong in a classroom after this – even though the “mentee” in question was probably not a student. Just an ex-student. … Harvard Crimson piece via the WSJ.

Update – 11.19.25 – The Globe’s Adrian Walker thinks Summers’s emails were “sub-juvenile” and the least of his career-long offenses.

Update II –– 11.20.25 — Summers is taking leave from teaching, GBH reports. … The Globe’s Joan Vennochi thinks the focus on Summers is distracting from Trump’s own ties to Epstein.

Bill Maher was on a roll Saturday night, caustically pointing out the obvious flaws of democratic socialism if you take its anti-capitalist rhetoric seriously. … I’ve harped on this general issue before and won’t do so again now. I’d just add that Maher is right when he suggests the real problem with democratic socialism is that its extremism merely empowers extremism on the right. They feed off each other. I guess you can call it a form of dialecticalism. Am I using that word right? I’m trying to remember from my very long-ago history and poli-sci courses

Update — Fareed Zakaria was a guest on Maher’s show last night. Here’s his most recent common-sense advice for Dems, via the Post.

— I knew there were a lot of them, but not this many: “New England college closures are accelerating, with 32 in the past decade” (BBJ)

— They all sound like a string of cliches anyways: “The No. 1 Country Song in America Is AI-Generated” (Newsweek)

— Close call, but I think she’s right: “Boston Fed president favors holding rates steady to cool inflation” (Globe)

— This could get very expensive – and controversial: “New State Coastal Resilience Plan Proposes Voluntary Buyouts” (Commonwealth Beacon)

— What similar ‘youth’ movement pops to your mind? “Putin Is Turning Eighth-Grade Classrooms Into Army Training Grounds” (WSJ)

— Speaking of Vladimir, you can thank Ukraine: “Why Maduro Probably Can’t Count on Putin” (The Atlantic)

— Giving credit where credit is due (and blame): “Trump’s obesity drug deal: the good, the bad, and the unknown” (Globe)

— Have you gotten a 20 percent raise lately? I didn’t think so. “Boston Mayor Wu to receive $43K raise after reelection, will be paid $250,000 in 2026” (Boston Herald)

— Nooooooo: “Goldberg v. O’Brien, Round 2?” (MassterList)

— Hmm. It’s sort of like binding arbitration but not quite: “Inside the Little-Known World of Private Judges for Hire” (WSJ)

— Local history that I wasn’t aware of: “250 years later, tribes in Mass. are ensuring their Revolutionary War veterans are honored” (WBUR)

If you have time, definitely check out the Globe’s excellent “Squeezed” package of stories on the plight of the middle class in Massachusetts, starting with the apparent mainbar (“Why the middle class is disappearing in Massachusetts”) and moving on to the second article that I’ve read so far (“One job, three generations, 30 years of inflation: A story from Massachusetts’ shrinking middle class”). The latter piece really hits home, looking at a Dorchester grandmother whose lifestyle trajectory is completely different from those of her daughter, who works in the same family child-care business as her mother, and her granddaughter. One generation could afford to buy a home and live in relative comfort. The younger generations, well, you know the answer.

Btw – As the Globe notes, the definition of “middle class” is tricky these days in Massachusetts. Most sources measure it by income, in this case around $70,000 to $200,000, give or take ten grand or so. Obviously, there are a lot of people in that category. But if you define the middle class as people who can somewhat comfortably afford the American Dream of buying a modest home, you’re talking about a much smaller number of middle-class residents today in Massachusetts – and it’s even worse in Greater Boston, where the median price of a single-family home is now more than $1 million. … And we’re not even talking about the skyrocketing costs of health care and higher education, two other big-ticket items increasingly burdening middle-class and other non-wealthy residents …

Btw II — Coincidently, the Globe series came out the same week as the Boston Foundation’s latest devastating look at the regional housing market, as GBH reports.

Btw III — Think affordable opportunities increase the farther west you move in Massachusetts? Think again. This NYT piece makes clear that the housing crisis has hit the Berkshires full force, with the same fundamental problem confronting the region: lack of new housing construction.