E-Mail This Article to a Friend Waiting game What’s Bill Galvin’s plan? Also, John Kerry rediscovers the ’60s, and Jimmy Kelly meets his temperamental match. BY ADAM REILLY

THE PRE-CAMPAIGN for next year’s gubernatorial election is already moving at a brisk clip. Tom Reilly, the Democratic attorney general, is working on his political vision. Deval Patrick, the former US assistant attorney general for civil rights, plans to announce his intentions next month. And incumbent Mitt Romney’s Red State high jinks have prompted speculation about which Republicans might succeed the governor if he quits after one term. Along with Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, Harvard Pilgrim CEO Charlie Baker seems to be seriously considering a GOP run: witness his newly scheduled speech at the Harvard Club of Boston’s annual meeting on April 27, which one club member calls a "high-profile opportunity for a major policy address."

Amid all this activity, though, another prospective candidate — Bill Galvin, the Democratic secretary of state — has kept a low profile. Unlike his potential Democratic rivals, Galvin hasn’t made headline-grabbing speeches or worked the local talk-show circuit. Instead, he’s been content to watch and wait. Which is something Galvin does exceedingly well.

The secretary’s detachment and knack for timing became famous in the 1983-’84 fight for the Speaker’s office between Tom McGee and George Keverian, when Galvin, then a state representative from Brighton, facilitated McGee’s ouster by throwing his support to Keverian after a prolonged period of neutrality. A grateful Keverian allowed Galvin to keep his job as House chair of the powerful Joint Committee on Government Regulations; six years later, Galvin returned this favor by challenging Keverian — successfully — for the Democratic state treasurer’s nomination, a move that cemented his reputation as the "Prince of Darkness" of Massachusetts politics. (For more on Galvin’s Machiavellian maneuverings, see "Bill Galvin’s Next Move," News and Features, March 9, 2001.) By abstaining from the gubernatorial fray, some political observers argue, the secretary is simply following his usual modus operandi. "He’s very cagey — almost to a fault," says one Galvin watcher. "He just sits and waits and waits and waits. I suspect that’s what he’ll do this time."

Lately, however, there have been subtle signs that Galvin may be raising his pseudo-campaign’s intensity. Last Saturday, in a Boston Globe story on a Democratic push to move the 2006 gubernatorial primaries from August to May, Galvin lashed out at "Democratic insiders" for suggesting changes in the political calendar. This mini-screed did two things for Galvin: heading into an election in which no one wants to be seen as a "Democratic insider," it gave him a head start on casting himself as an outsider; and it allowed the secretary of state — who’s charged with monitoring the state’s elections — to publicly oppose an August-to-May shift, something that would complicate his wait-and-see strategy. Making the primaries earlier would cost all candidates three months, but it would be especially problematic for Galvin, given his low visibility to date.

On Monday, the Globe’s editorial page published a letter lauding Galvin for his ongoing probe of Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble’s takeover of South Boston–based Gillette. The missive was ostensibly written by Edward G. Flaherty of Hanover, a former Gillette employee, but it read like something a punchy Galvin operative had composed for maximum political effect. ("Secretary of State William Galvin should be commended for his efforts to keep Gillette in Boston," Flaherty wrote. "Specifically, highlighting the private interactions between Procter & Gamble and Gillette provides a context of what really happens in the corporate world today.... As you know, a state that values corporate longevity and welcomes new enterprise is a state that prospers. Massachusetts’ economic vitality is a cause we can all rally around!") And on Tuesday, as the Phoenix went to press, Galvin hosted a private, $125-a-plate fundraiser at Anthony’s Pier 4.

Could an official announcement be imminent? In an interview with the Phoenix, Galvin was characteristically opaque about his intentions. "I’ve said very clearly that I’m very interested, and that’s where it is," he said of the governor’s job. "While people are making plans at this point, everyone, including the incumbent, is not in full campaign mode as yet. It’s a little early to do that." Later, asked if he’d established a timetable for deciding whether to run, Galvin insisted he hadn’t. "Four years ago, the incumbent was the last person to get into the race, if I remember correctly," he noted. "Another significant factor was Robert Reich. He didn’t come in until December, which by most people’s standards, including mine, would have seemed late at the time, but it obviously didn’t affect his viability. He didn’t win the nomination, but he was a very strong contender.

"If you’re an unknown," Galvin concluded, "perhaps you need more time. If you’re self-funding, perhaps you need less time. I’m neither, so perhaps that puts me somewhere in the middle."

The secretary will probably soft-pedal his possible candidacy until his probe of the Gillette takeover runs its course. On social issues, he is regarded as moderate to conservative; a Catholic, Galvin is personally opposed to abortion, for example. But he’s also an economic populist who has creatively used his current position to target corporate malfeasance, including highly public challenges to the public-utilities and securities industries.

Galvin’s ongoing investigation into the Procter & Gamble buyout, which is focused on whether the best interests of Gillette shareholders are served by the takeover, probably won’t derail the deal. It will, however, give Galvin plenty of free press, and help him sharpen his credentials as an economic liberal dedicated to shielding ordinary people from the impersonal brutality of 21st-century corporate America. If Galvin formally declares his candidacy for governor — or if, like Tom Reilly, he does everything but — the Gillette investigation will immediately acquire a political tinge. By allowing Reilly and Patrick to bask in the gubernatorial limelight early on — and keeping himself in the shadows — Galvin gets to appear as though he’s not in the game.

"He’s a master at being low-key while getting headlines at the same time," one Democratic observer says. "Galvin is one of the smartest people I know, and he’s smart enough to know that the minute you become a candidate, you start getting killed by the press." "There’s no loss there for him," another Democrat says of Galvin’s Gillette investigation. "The people making all the money in this are senior CEOs, and they’re probably going to be voting Republican anyway. He gets some ink at the same time he defends the little guy. It’s truth, justice, and the Galvin Way."

Of course, Galvin likely hasn’t decided whether he’s going to run for governor. In 2002, he joined a crowded Democratic gubernatorial field that included state Senate president Tom Birmingham, State Treasurer Shannon O’Brien, State Senator Warren Tolman, and former Democratic National Committee chair Steve Grossman — then bailed out in January after his campaign failed to gain traction. (Instead, Galvin successfully sought re-election as secretary of state.) It was a rare misstep, and Galvin certainly wants to avoid replicating it. He may not make up his mind until Romney’s intentions become clearer and the Democratic field comes into sharper focus.

If Romney bails, and a big-name Democrat like Joe Kennedy Jr. jumps in the race, expect Galvin to take a pass. But if, several months from now, only Reilly and Patrick have committed to Democratic runs, plan on seeing the secretary formally enter the fray. "You could make a case that, if it’s a three-person fight, any of those three could win," says one Democratic insider. "Patrick would have the effect of pushing Reilly to the left, and Galvin could squeak through."