I hope we can continue to maintain several discussion threads
simultaneously. The swimming pool thread has been useful for me since I
am merely a leisure swimmer and previously was ambivalent about pool
issues. Although I am parting from ambivalence, continued discussion will
help me reach an informed opinion.
However, the thread I'd like to pick up on here is the discussion of
uncontested candidates and democracy. I grew up in a household that
embraced democracy and political debate. We took for granted that no
singular candidate could possibly represent the entire constituency of
citizens and array of ideas, and that naturally all seats ought to be
contested on democratic principle.
If I dare to speak on behalf of my sister, Councilmember Pam Palmer, I
would suggest that this family philosophy is in large part what led Pam to
run against Mayor Paul Agidius, who otherwise would have been an
uncontested candidate. Although (to my knowledge:-) ) Pam is not formally
affiliated with either of the major political parties, when she campaigned
for mayor she received occasional admonishments from Democrats and
Republicans alike for challenging the incumbent, Mayor Agidius.
Likewise, I believe former candidate Bill Rember, a Democrat, was
motivated, in part, to challenge Republican Maynard Miller to ensure the
seat did not go unchallenged. (It wasn't that simple, but certainly a
component.) I believe he received similar admonishments from a few
Democrats who believed, for some reason, that the incumbent should not be
challenged.
Now we have four unchallenged seats, and the certainty of a council
vacancy (future mayor Comstock's midterm council seat) following the
election. It sets a political climate that feels like a one party
system--as Michael Parenti coined "Demopublicans." I don't know if the two
major parties just aren't aggressive enough to identify candidates, or if
the parties have melded together so much that they are indistinguishable
and thus there is no need for contested elections.
Whatever the case, Steve Cooke has set the right example by asking even
uncontested candidates questions. And we should ask them some of the
hardest questions before us. I will leave those to the list for now.
>From a Moscow Vision 2020 vantage point, one concern is whether a
candidate has the leadership required to carry us into the 21st century.
For those on the list, it may seem banal for me to point out that elected
officials need to keep step with technology and envision how technology
can be used to enhance the democratic process. While not even the majority
of citizens are "on-line" we are rapidly heading in that direction. Its
pace may exceed the acquisition of microwave ovens.
Politicians at the cusp of the century and millenium who are
computer-phobic are going to be left behind in the dust. The laudatory
reviews that Tom Trail has received for his exemplary use of
communicating with his constituents through the Vision 2020 listserver and
personal e-mail is well deserved.
While I am with the camp who are both perplexed and disturbed about the
trend toward uncontested elections, I would like those very candidates
locally to reveal their perspective regarding communication with
constituents, staying abreast of public discourse such as the Vision 2020
listserver, and what they will do to enhance the democratic and political
process for the 21st century. If that is too ambitious, perhaps the
next decade or few years is within their reach to respond.
Just my two cents, plus a few more.
Best,
Susan Palmer
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
Susan Palmer Phone: 208-885-6616
Women's Resource Specialist FAX: 208-885-6285
for Education Outreach, Gender Equity, and Research
Women's Center e-mail: susanp@uidaho.edu
[Lecturer, Sociology Dept.]
University of Idaho
Moscow, Idaho 83844-1064
"People convinced against their will,
hold the same opinion still."
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*