I don't have time right now for a lengthy response but David - this is a
GREAT IDEA. And yes before not after the election. The learning curve
once your sworn in on the first working day of the year in your term is
1000's of %. This kind of study and learning would be so helpful. Other
skills include: public speaking, ability to debate, present concise facts
and information on issues and your position, creative solutions on the key
issues, even the basics of running a capaign. I am a moderator for just
such a site: an e-group called How to Get Elected Running Green. There is
a "How to run a campaign manual" [written in 1996] available (that is
currently being updated) and dialogue, questions and answers shared among
the already 75 elected Green officials across the country.
And the difference between campaigning and getting down there and doing the
work - what a difference a day makes in your life. Budgets, who's really in
charge, how the system works all need to be learned. If one is serious
about running they will have been studying this, have opinions about
various facets but the rude awakening still happens no matter how much you
think you know.
For now,
At 01:11 PM 11/3/00 -0600, David Brauer wrote:
>An idle thought rattling around my brain since we started discussing the
>2001 Council races:
>
>It's clear we will have a lot of first-time candidates. That's great,
>because people with different life experiences can now apply that to
>political office.
>
>But there is also a lot to learn about governing the city -- even for the
>involved and aware. Part of the skill you must display as a candidate is
>becoming educated. Still, it must a nightmare, learning the details behind
>city finances, the MCDA, the charter, etc. It must also be haphazard.
>
>I wonder if we can make it easier for newcomers. So here's my question --
>especially to those who have run or those who are going to:
>
>Would it be worth it to try to set up "candidates continuing education"
>class? My idea -- very loose at this point -- is something like the Kennedy
>School of Government does for new Congressfolks. Get together a group of
>experienced community folks -- city bureaucrats, representatives of
>important foundations or community groups, people experienced in
>government -- and provide a series of voluntary tutorials on city basics.
>(The Kennedy school does this for the winners, but I want to do it before,
>not after the election.)
>
>No candidate would have to attend, but those who do might have a better
>underpinning about why what goes on and why. Theoretically, candidates'
>policies might become smarter, or more sophisticated -- or if they are in
>opposition, their arguments could become sharper.
>
>The key thing is that we, the voters, would benefit if positions are more
>thoughtfully worked out and better argued.
>
>There are, of course some dangers. Candidates might feel they are being
>"indoctrinated" by the very people they seek to reform. We would have to
>work out a way to make it clear this is non-partisan, and candidates --
>whether they agree or disagree -- should not treat this as a debate but a
>learning experience they can accept or reject. Obviously, there would have
>to be some thought as to a broad-based program of speakers, not just
>elitists, or insiders, etc.
>
>Also, city staffers might be worried incumbants would penalize them if they
>are educating challengers or outsiders. And opponents for the same seat
>might not want to share a room, and tip off their arguments.
>
>Anyway, I know good candidates spend a lot of time educating themselves. But
>I think seminar approach might be an important compliment.
>
>The question is, is it a good idea, or a pie-in-the-sky waste of time?
>
>Please post your reaction to the forum: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>David Brauer
>Kingfield - Ward 10
>Not a candidate for anything but always has more to learn
>
>
>
Annie Young
Ward 6 - East Phillips
Citywide at-large Park Board Commissioner
Working to build a sustainable community
