Addressing archaic, deeply entrenched legislation which gets in the way of efficient government would be one of incumbent Governor Deval Patrick’s top priorities if he is elected to a second term this November, the Governor told several college reporters in a conference call Monday night.

In the midst of a tight three-way race for the governor’s seat against Republican Charlie Baker and Independent Timothy Cahill, Patrick took about 30 minutes to discuss his vision for a second term, as well as fielding questions from the student reporters.

Patrick came onto the line around 8:15 p.m., greeting the student journalists and outlining his plans for the next four years if he is reelected.

“To me, this is an election that is about a choice of values,” said Patrick. “This is about whether we move forward, or whether we go back to some old policies and some old ways that frankly, in my opinion, have gotten us into the national economic mess we’ve been in.” 
The Governor then spoke to what he sees as some of his administration’s accomplishments.

“We are first in the nation in our rate of job growth,” he said, “we have focused on a few goals that we know that if we get them right, we will achieve those goals.”

Patrick next addressed what he sees as a disparity in educational opportunities across the Bay State.

“The kids who are stuck in that [achievement] gap are poor children, children with special needs, who speak English as a second language, and children of color,” he said. “It’s an educational and an economic issue that we have an achievement gap at all,” he continued.

“For [Lieutenant Governor] Tim Murray and I, a second term is about finishing the work that we have started,” said the Governor. “It’s great that we have a record-breaking rate of job gains,” he elaborated, “young people and families are moving back to the Commonwealth, and in health care, 98 percent of our citizens have health care today, but it still costs too much, so cost control is at the top of the agenda for the second term.”

After detailing his administration’s achievements and plans, Patrick took one question from each reporter on the line, beginning with a writer at the University of Massachusetts Boston, who asked about the Governor’s plans for educational financing compared to his Republican opponent Charlie Baker’s.

Patrick directed attention to a higher education bond bill he supported, pointing out that the bill would move increased funding to the state’s public higher education institutions.

“First of all, the higher educational bond bill is a $2 billion bond bill,” he said. “It’s the largest bond bill in 30 years, I believe.”

Patrick then discussed his plans relative to Baker’s.

“Charlie has made comments about what he wants to do,” he said, “he’s talking about some $2.5 billion in budget cuts that he’s going to make, and he won’t be specific about where they’ll come from, but you better believe they’ll come from higher education, so we’re either going to move forward or we’re going to move backward,” he said, echoing the theme of his message yesterday evening.

The next question, which came from a reporter at Tufts University, pertained to student loan reform.

Patrick described how his administration had worked to bolster Massachusetts’ credit rating, affording the Commonwealth a greater ability to issue student loans.

“We have been able to balance our budget responsibly and on time here,” he said, “and the way we have been able to balance our budget is with a combination of spending cuts, so we now can make the kinds of adjustments to create jobs and issue loans,” he said.

“The rating agencies have reappraised our rating at AA.”

That question was followed up with a query from a Northeastern student aimed at the state’s relatively high rate of tuition for public higher education. Patrick pointed to longstanding legislation which makes it difficult to raise tuition at the state’s public schools, but allows instead for student fees to be adjusted more readily, stating that he would like to see a more common sense approach to fixing a cost for public higher education.

“There’s a raging debate in higher education about whether you go to the top of what’s tolerable in tuition, charging those who can pay the full amount, and then increase financial aid…so that’s something public and private schools have been grappling with,” the Governor said. “Another thing that’s behind this speaks to more systematic complexities in higher education,” he continued, “mandatory fees are higher than tuition, and that has everything to do with fees remaining on the campus and the tuition going back to the center.”

In addition, Patrick posited that he feels the state’s public offerings aren’t exactly a rip-off.

“I will say due respect to Northeastern, but public institutions are a pretty darn good bargain here in Massachusetts,” he said.

The Governor next fielded a question about rates and timeframes on the MBTA, before taking one question from the Daily Collegian and a reporter from Bristol Community College. Patrick Roath, the Patrick campaign’s deputy press secretary, said this was based on time constraints.

In answering the final question from the two public university reporters, Patrick again harped back to what he called the “almost byzantine” nature “of the way we support public colleges and universities.”

As an example, Patrick referenced how his administration factors into collective bargaining negotiations with the state university faculty.

“We are responsible in the administration for setting the parameters for negotiating collective bargaining with the faculty, but the state does not provide the standards necessary for funding those contracts, so you have this weird thing where you’re telling the bargaining unit or issuing parameters saying, ‘look, this is what the state can afford,’ and the universities may or may not transmit those parameters back to the collective bargaining unit [at the school in question].”

The reasons behind this seemingly irrational relation between the state and its schools, according to Patrick, are simply that this is how it has been done.

“Why are we doing that?” he asked rhetorically, “because we always have.”

In his concluding remarks, Patrick circled back to his primary motif from throughout the dialogue: that the state’s bureaucracy has not served it well, and that he will attempt with a second term to make the state function more cohesively.

“Just saying that the state should raise the level of appropriation for public colleges and universities doesn’t really get at some of the other underlying complexities and irrational outcomes those complexities imply,” he said. “We need to brave about the big issues facing the Commonwealth; it means getting to real problem solving and past clichés.”

Sam Butterfield can be reached at [email protected].