June 13, 2007

Dear "Lefty"…

I’m sorry I let you down. I could try harder to satisfy you, but I doubt that’s possible, so I won’t. But you asked me about my take on the substance of Ms. Oldak's column, and that question merits an answer. I may also have some questions for you in the process.

Ms. Oldak is spot-on the mark with her remarks. I wish her luck though. She'll need it because the wealthy contributors who bankroll the state party will have something to say about it. Aside from Bobby Haircut's 4 years (when we controlled the house and senate), we've had plenty of time to do something to make the tax system more progressive and failed to do so. Why is that?

As to Ms. Oldak's freedom of expression? As a staff person to an elected official, her first job is to make Roger look good, not advance her own political career. Any policy ideas she’s got should be heard through Roger’s mouth or written above his signature. Revising the state tax structure could be Roger’s policy initiative for him to advance on the county’s priority list and testify in favor of. Many, many legislative assistants come up with lots of good policy ideas, but do they write op-ed pieces? You tell me.

My guess is Ms. Oldak is positioning herself to be the party’s appointment for Goldwater’s seat should she step down. When and if Marilyn does so is anyone’s guess. Should she, and should it come to a party appointment, I hope the central committee interviews a broad field of candidates. Whatever her merits, Ms. Oldak came in 4th (over 1,200 votes off the mark) after targeting a beloved, accomplished legislator for defeat. Other potential candidates stayed out of the race out of respect to Marilyn (and Brian, Susan, and Bill). This behavior should not be rewarded.

Your Friend,

Slacker
Posted by Montgomery Slacker at 15:42

2 comments:

lefty said...

Not gonna give up, huh? On to a new tack, I see. Cool. Let's play.

Since I posted my series of comments in response to your original post, I've had the chance to do a little digging on the District 16 race from last year, and as before, you are wrong on multiple levels.

First and foremost, nobody "targeted" anyone in District 16, or anywhere else for that matter. In each district, there are three delegate seats, and the top three vote getters get the seats. One doesn't challenge a particular incumbent, but instead simply runs for office. Surely you know this.

The deadline for filing for the primary last year was in early July. Until very late in the process, it was understood that Marilyn Goldwater wasn't running. She had been ill last year, and missed around 20% of the 2006 session.

Reggie Oldak decided to run during that time period. So did Charles Chester. At the last minute (three days before the deadline, in fact), Marilyn Goldwater changed her mind and decided to run, helped along by the incumbents, who you so whimsically call "Bill" and "Susan," also known as Delegates Bronrott and Lee. Incumbents gotta stick together, dontcha know?

This is a problem when incumbents display the attitude you glorify (who the hell decided that incumbents should not be challenged out of some misplaced "respect"? And just what in the name of all that is good and holy does "beloved" have to do with anything in politics?). Just as Reggie Oldak was and is free to write about political issues while serving as a council aide, she was free to run for office without being branded some sort of turncoat. Especially when she, along with others, was led to believe that Marilyn Goldwater wasn't running.

Your attitude -- that incumbents are entitled to call the tune, everyone else has to dance to that tune and "wait their turn" -- is a traditional one in Montgomery County, but it's increasingly anachronistic. Just ask Ida Ruben, Gareth Murray, Adrienne Mandel, Carol Petzold and Jean Cryor, not to mention Mike Subin and Howie Denis. Winds 'o change, they be a blowin'.

Another point, related to the above. You bemoan the choke hold that the "wealthy contributors who bankroll the state party" have on our tax structure. How are things ever going to change if people like you defend the noblesse oblige of Bri, Billy, Suzy and Mar? If things need changing, the most likely people to do the changing are not the same old same old, but instead new faces with new ideas.

And let's be clear -- Marilyn Goldwater, after assuring the voters that she could and would serve, couldn't and didn't. Her sense of noblesse oblige is very finely honed -- she's not leaving until they carry her out, literally. Even if she physically can't serve, she's bound and determined to stay on, come hell or high water, damn the consequences to her district, her county, her party and the House as a whole. How is that a good thing for anyone not named Marilyn Goldwater?

And Goldwater's problems are not some deep, dark secret. The Gazette ran a story about it -- perhaps you read it?. Your bland "when and if" statement is either ignorant or disingenuous -- Marilyn Goldwater didn't make an appearance in Annapolis after February 2, missed 65% of the legislative session, and hasn't been seen in public since the end of the session. For all intents and purposes, District 16 (and the rest of Montgomery County, too) are down a delegate. To make matters worse, Delegate Goldwater is a vice-chair of the Health and Environment Committee, so that body suffered from her absence as well. And how can we escape the conclusion that she wasn't honest with the voters, either before the election in 2006 or after missing most of the session in 2007?

You obviously like the incumbents in District 16, and you probably live there. That's great for you, I suppose, but how is the current situation good for District 16, Montgomery County or the House of Delegates?

The sad fact is that sometime before 2010, Marilyn Goldwater will have to be replaced. While it would be preferable to hold special elections, those darned "powers that be" that you decry in the context of taxes don't like special elections, and instead vest the power of naming a replacement in the county Democratic Central Committee.

In conclusion, I guess we can add "District 16 incumbent protection" to your Roger Berliner obsession. So Reggie Oldak, far from being simply an extension of the Roger Berliner situation, is in fact a two-fer: she works for Roger, and she had the temerity to run against "Bill" and "Susan" and "Marilyn". I guess Reggie's not getting a Season's Greetings card from MoCo Sprawl, huh?

All BS aside, if you're going to blog anonymously, it's imperative to put aside, as much as possible, your own personal prejudices, and let the reader decide. At a minimum, you ought to put your biases out on the table so that everyone knows what's really going on. You aren't doing that and honestly, you never really have. The result is a series of petty jabs at people you don't like because of who they associate with or who they ran against or some other little inside notion that only you know, and that affects and skews everything you write about. That's bad blogging, as I see it. And you just keep digging deeper and deeper into it each time you try to justify yourself on this subject. As some philosopher once said, if I were you, I'd stop digging.

10:31 PM
Montgomery Slacker said...

Lefty,

Thank you for your comment. A dear friend reminded me recently that I was once a “young turk”.

Regards,

Slacker

11:01 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)