Ron:
The non-partisan nature of the Minneapolis City Council refers more
to the way it is organized than the ideologies of the candidates. It
means that instead of having a Democratic Party candidate and a
Republican Party candidate (and other major party candidates)
chosen in the parties' primaries in September and the top vote
getter in each party primary ensured a place on the November
ballot, it means that all the candidates run in the same primary and
the top two vote getters get on the November ballot.
I personally think it is ridiculous to think that 1) political parties
should not endorse in "non-partican" races and 2) candidates
should not affiliate themselves with an ideology if they are running
in "non-partisan" races. Endorsements by political parties help
voters determine what candidates believe in and support. (In an
ideal world anyway...)
Cara Letofsky
An outed fan of machine politics and Boss Tweed...
Ward 9
From: "Ron Lischeid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Mpls] C.W.O.P.A.
Date sent: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:40:45 -0600
> Over the past 3-4 weeks, I have read may posts on different but related
> topics, all having to do with the upcoming mayoral and city council
> races- topics like campaign finance reform, endorsements and candidate
> screening. But the one thing that hasn't come up yet is this: These
> races are supposed to be NON-PARTISAN races for elected city officials.
> Non-partisan, as in not-aligned-with-any-particular-political-party.
> Why would a candidate seeking an office in a non-partisan election need
> the endorsement of a political party?
>
> Suppose, just suppose, that 14 candidates ran as a 'team' in the hopes
> of making Minneapolis a better city in which to live, work, play, raise
> a family and get an education. Suppose, that as a group, they produced
> a written 'vision'- a manifesto of sorts- of what Minneapolis could
> become with different leadership during the next decade. The problem
> with individual candidates is that each candidate has their own 'wish
> list' but once they are elected, they are competing with the 'wish
> lists' of each of their colleagues. This is the reason that government
> is so slow to respond.
>
> I personally would support such an effort. Lets call it "C.W.O.P.A."-
>
> * Candidates WithOut Party Affiliation
> * Candidates WithOut Partisan Attitudes
> * Candidates WithOut Personal Agendas
> * Candidates WithOut Professional Ambitions
> * Candidates WithOut Pay-backs A-waiting
>
> All of this could lead to:
>
> * Citizens WithOut Political Apathy
>
> Lets start with the mayor's race. At the present time, there are 4
> candidates trying to get the DFL endorsement. From where I am looking,
> the current incumbent mayor is in the driver's seat for that
> endorsement. That leaves R.T., Michele (couldn't resist- sorry!) and
> Dick as number 2, 3 and 4 (not necessarily in that order), but all
> losers. Everyone else (DFL losers, Republican, Independence, Green,
> Libertarian, independent) is trying to jockey for position for the
> number 2 spot after the September primary. What would happen if Lisa or
> R.T. decided not to seek the DFL endorsement and instead decided to take
> the 'high road' and truly participate in a non-partisan election (and it
> is still not too late for either of them to make that decision).
> Suppose that they found 13 individual candidates for each of the ward
> council races that also decided to by-pass the endorsement processes of
> any political party. And suppose they also found like-minded candidates
> running for park board, school board and other offices this fall that
> were interested in joining the team.
>
> Now suppose that this group of non-partisan candidates all sat down
> together and put on their thinking caps and came up with a 'master plan'
> of how the city would be governed under their joint leadership. Suppose
> that they came up with a document that could be presented to the voters
> in Minneapolis in advance of the election that said this is what we hope
> to accomplish once a majority of us are elected and this is how we
> intend to get it done. This would be like any other team- each player
> has their own strengths and weaknesses. One player would be the
> point-person on transportation issues and another player would be the
> point person on budgetary issues. The candidates would have already
> agreed that they were willing to work together to achieve common goals
> for the good of all the residents, businesses and visitors of
> Minneapolis. The voters would know what they are 'buying' when they
> vote in November. This non-partisan coalition of candidates could
> conceivably expect to finish either number 1 or number 2 in the
> September primary. It would be them against the incumbent, DFL-machine
> supported candidates in the November general election. This
> non-partisan team of candidates could conceivably be made up of some
> DFL, some Republicans, with a few Independences, Greens and independents
> that would appeal to a broad range of voters. Clearly, there are 35+%
> of voters in Minneapolis that are not DFL and I would guess that there
> are 15+% of dyed-in-the-wool DFL that are disgruntled enough to vote
> against the sitting incumbents. Sounds like an interesting race to me.
> One that I might even be interested in getting involved in (either as a
> candidate or as a volunteer). Maybe even a team that Barret Lane would
> like to join.
>
> The 'Dream Team' candidates could reduce expenses by common literature
> and lawn signs, printed in quantities that would reduce individual unit
> costs. Lawn signs could simply say, 'Support the Dream Team'. Each
> candidate, as I understand it, is allowed a 3 word endorsement on the
> election ballot. All the voters would have to do is vote for the
> candidates that are identified on the ballot as being part of the team.
>
> If something like this isn't possible, then I think the only honest
> thing to do is admit that these are really PARTISAN races and run the
> primary like any other normal election. DFL candidates run against each
> other in September and the winner is on the general election ballot.
> Republican candidates run against each other in September and the winner
> is also on the November ballot. Independence, Green, Libertarian and
> independent candidates likewise. This allows the voters some choice.
> As it is now, the choice is usually this: "chose between the following 2
> DFL candidates in November that survived from the 6 DFL candidates that
> ran in the primary in September". It always amazes me whenever I hear
> someone refer to the 'DFL-controlled Minneapolis City Council'. It
> can't (or shouldn't be) DFL-controlled if it is really non-partisan- if
> it is DFL-controlled, then lets atleast be honest and admit that this is
> a partisan race for a partisan office.
>
> "C.W.O.P.A." - It just might be an idea whose time has come.
>
> Ron Lischeid
> Windom Neighborhood
> #3 in the hearts and minds of voters in District 63A
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
