After taking control of Salt Lake City to save the 2002 Winter Olympics, Mitt Romney took Massachusetts by storm. His campaign for governor successfully pressed the theory that the state needed a Republican to counter the absolute power of Democrats on Beacon Hill. Over his four years in power, he checked the liberal tendencies of the Democratic leaders, his leadership was vital in revitalizing the state’s economy and he turned the wild spending habits of the Legislature into a surplus. Romney displayed crucial leadership in the aftermath of the death of a woman in one of the new Big Dig tunnels by seizing control of the investigation and repair of the tunnel’s failing cement ceiling. He truly was able to work across partisan divides to assure the passage of a form of universal healthcare. By the sound of it, Romney was a very effective governor, but despite all the positives, he has burned his bridges with veiled and direct criticisms of Massachusetts and has alarmingly altered his stances on many social issues ranging from abortion to gun control. As a result, he traded in a carefully coiffed presidential image and became a court jester merely trying to curry favor with conservative Republicans.

Like his three male predecessors, Romney came into office with his eyes clearly set on a higher office. Both William Weld and Paul Celluci left the governorship when appointed ambassadors while Michael Dukakis won the Democratic nomination for president in 1988. In contrast to Dukakis, who lost much momentum after the Democratic National Convention by spending time governing Massachusetts, Romney has been campaigning for over two years. In the first six months of 2006, he spent 81 days traveling on 45 visits to 20 other states. But this alone does not ruin his presidential chances. His political opportunism will be the death knell of his campaign for the nation’s highest office. For the first three years of his time in office, Mitt Romney did not address the problem of the Big Dig. Though the spiraling costs occurred under the watch of previous administrations, Romney’s feeble attempts to take more control of the project were blocked. It was not until a fateful July morning when Milena Del Valle was killed by a huge concrete slab of collapsed ceiling. Romney exhibited remarkable leadership and poise. He mastered the engineering lexicon. He explained the finer points of the complicated issue in simple terms everyone could understand. His success only raises one question: Where was this Mitt Romney the past three years?

Another example of his opportunism has been his attempts to move to the right on social issues. In the waning months of his term, he authorized the Massachusetts State Police to arrest any illegal immigrants they came across. He tried to take this harsh stance even though cities like Cambridge and Somerville operated as sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants under his watch. One of Deval Patrick’s first moves as governor was to shut down the state police’s authority before they had even begun to apply it. Also, before relinquishing the governorship to Patrick, Romney made nearly $400 million in emergency budget cuts. He claimed they were necessary to balance the budget, but Patrick restored the cuts which included cuts in healthcare for the poor and salaries for human services workers.

Perhaps the most glaring opportunism comes from the newly mandated health insurance law. Romney vetoed a $295 fine on businesses that do not offer health insurance. It is a central part of the program: it would raise some $45 million annually to be used to fund services, it would entice businesses to offer health insurance and it was almost a crucial deal breaker in the House and Senate’s compromise. In short, his veto could have wreaked havoc on the whole program; yet, on the campaign trail he criticizes the Democrats for overriding it and credits himself for protecting the interests of the business community.

Mitt Romney should be the ideal candidate for the presidency. He was called one of the most beautiful people in the country. He has a long history of business success. He inherited a mess when he went to the Winter Olympics, but came out with a $100 million dollar surplus. In four years under his watch, the Massachusetts unemployment rate dropped 0.7 percentage points and over 5,000 new for profit corporations were created. He reined in a budget gone wild, helping to create a surplus by the time he left office. But his political opportunism reeks. He ran for governor of Massachusetts as a moderate, but during his run for president he has “evolved” into a strict conservative. With a history of pursuing headlines and kowtowing the changing political winds, how can he be projected as a steadfast leader?

Nick Milano is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at [email protected].