I'd like to give a different perspective on this issue, from the point of
view of a person trying to be an endorsed candidate for the library board.
Alan Shilepsky wrote:
> I think Ron is onto something. The partisan nature of our Minneapolis
> "non-partisan" elections has delivered our governance into the hands of
> a small number of people who have the time, interest and motivation to
> participate in the (mind-boggling) number of fund-raisings, screenings,
> endorsements, and machinations (making sure convention rules and
> officers favor our person) that are involved--EIGHT MONTH OUT!!!
Each of those prsons at screenings, fund-raisers, coffee parties, etc. is
another person I have to convince that I know what I'm talking about and I
know what I'm doing and that I would be a good choice to do the work of the
library board. I live on an eentsy-beentsy fixed income. There is no way in
the world I could afford to pay to advertise myself as a person to take on
this job. It's also true that I've spent the last fifteen years or so
putting myself into community situations to get to this point. It's not a
career choice--I'm already 58--I just kept working away and low and behold,
here I am thinking I can do something worth doing for my community.If I can
not convince even DFL party regulars that I am a good choice, then I sure as
shooting cannot convince anyone else. And, if I cannot convince DFL party
regulars, then I'm not the one for the job. I think I am the one for the
job at this juncture in the library's history because I have a clear picture
of how to move.
There was a time when the city council was a 6-7 split between DFL and IR,
but the IR's quit or moved elsewhere or whatever. That has skewered debate,
but there's virtually nothing we can do if IRs decide not to participate.
Shulsted was the last of them and I think he ran as an independent. The
disappearance of the IRs has led to a drawing apart of the DFLers in the
city so that it's possible to discern at least two different philosophies at
work during any debate--usually three.
The elected leaders come and go in city hall, the line and middle management
staff stay. More than half of what happens does so because the staff do
it. Leaders can jaw all they want about the direction of the city, but it's
still the staff who do or fail to do the work.
>
>
> The average citizen who comes out to vote on Nov 6 is participating in a
> charade. Most of the seats are signed, sealed and delivered by then.
Endorsement by either party means people help you convince the rest of the
populace that you're the one for the job. It would be insulting to the
voters to think that this is some kind of a cake walk and sewed up from the
git go. I don't have any such notion and no one else with any sense would
either.
> The money, the aura of "serious candidate", the laundry list of
> prestigious and necessary endorsements have already been parcelled out
> to the people for whom this activity is part of their careers (public
> employment, non-profits getting grants, consultants and lobbyists?),
So far as I am aware, the AFL-CIO, AFSME, people with money to give and etc.
don't even know my name. I will request that they endorse me and hope that
a few of them will remember that I was a union member when I had a union job
and that I endorsed my union--with all its warts.
> The principles of the IR party are not my principles. Were I to run under
> their banner I'd be a liar. The principles of the DFL are closer to my
> own principles. So while I'll never be entirely comfortable as a DFLer,
> at least I agree, in principle, with their philosophy.
> WMarks, Central
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
