Three for Tomorrow

By the way, in case you haven't heard, there's an election tomorrow. Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. If you don't know where you have to go to vote, click here.

In case you're wondering (and I'm sure you are) here are three endorsements for tomorrow.

It appears, 18 months after he started running, Democrat Deval Patrick is on the precipice of becoming governor. He would be the first black governor in Massachusetts, and just the second in the country. These are things truly worth mentioning.

In the last seven weeks, when engaged directly by Republican Kerry Healey, we have learned more about Patrick than in the 16 months before that. But we haven't learned the details of what he will do in office. For the Patrick faithful who yell, "read the website, it's loaded with policy papers," we still have questions after reading. He preaches reducing property taxes, but we're still not sure we would qualify, and we're still waiting to find out how more local aid will be tied to ensuring lower property taxes. We're not 100 percent convinced he will keep MCAS intact. He hasn't fully outlined his budgeting plans for the many initiatives he favors.

Healey, however, hasn't offered much more detail. We know she wants to lower the income tax, but hasn't explained how to handle the $700 million loss in state revenue. We know she is vehemently anti-illegal immigrant, but beyond her opposition to in-state tuition for these illegals, she has offered no solutions to the larger problem (which is really a federal issue). She talks about improving public safety, but has not offered one distinct plan to do it.

With these lack of details hanging in the air, we are forced to take the big-picture measure of these candidates. Patrick's message of hope and "Together we can" is far more appealing than Healey's message of what she's against, instead of what she is for. So, here's an endorsement of Deval Patrick for governor.

As important as the governor's race is to the future of the state, the race for the Worcester 3rd House seat, which covers all of Fitchburg, is even more important to our city.

The city needs help in a number of areas -- transportation, revitalizing downtown, bringing in business, turning over old, vacant mill buildings, improving schools and public safety -- and with the shackles of Proposition 2 1/2 can't do it all itself. It needs help from the state, and it needs someone in the Legislature to tirelessly press its case.

Republican Ed Niemczura is a political newcomer, and while he has been thoughtful and earnest in his campaign, he has been unable to reach the level of someone who has the political skills to maneuver effectively in an overwhelming minority at the State House.

Democrat Steve DiNatale offers experience as a School Committee member and city councilor, but has few major policy wins. He has proven again that he is a maniacally strong local campaigner. He will have to prove that he can improve upon his performance as a local official and become an effective legislator.

While we have questions about DiNatale's effectiveness as the city's chief advocate at the State House, he is clearly the city's most qualified candidate his fall, and we endorse Steve DiNatale for state representative.

Finally, proponents for and against Question 1, which would create wine-only licenses for supermarkets and grocery stores, have waged the most expensive ballot question campaign in state history.

Approval of Question 1 would offer convenience and likely lower prices for consumers. Thirty-four states currently allow alcohol sales by grocers, and there is no proof in those states of increased sales to minors through supermarkets. While passage would create more competition for liquor stores, those stores would maintain their monopoly on beer and hard liquor sales, eliminating much of the fear that this measure would force hardship on liquor stores.

In the spirit of convenience and a marketplace that will likely lead to lower prices for customers, we endorse Question 1.