Some More Aldermanic Endorsements: Madison

There are three threshold issues as the election season opens. These are issues that do not necessarily measure a candidate from left to right, but establish a basis for my support. The candidates I did not endorse fall in a range from unacceptable to excellent.

I imagine this discussion will go on through the April election and beyond.

Trolley: On December 22, 2006, Waxing America said: Trolley Follies: Let The Voters Decide

The Question: "Will you vote to put a referendum on the ballot for the bond issue needed to fund the eight miles of Madison light rail?" In other words, let the public decide on the largest financial commitment in the history of the city.

Three weeks later, Stuart Levitan put the question to the mayor and got a squishy response. During January most of the aldermanic candidates and two of the principal mayoral challengers made it clear they supported a referendum.  Finally, on Thursday of this week, the incumbent mayor, Dave Cieslewicz, indicated support for a referendum.

Let's move on to important issues.

Poverty: The problems of families living below the poverty level is paramount.

• Mayors and Public Schools: Another Collision  ...For over thirty years I said, "There is nothing a mayor can do that has the impact on a city that is as great as the public school system."
• New York Times Plays New Years Joke on Madison ...A lot of attention to the problems of a sociable downtown, and not much attention to the issues of crime, poverty, and race.
• Madison's Allied Drive Needs Far More Than Improved Housing and Social Services ...Yes, and badly needed is a plan that works off of the resources of the community and the skills of the residents. If the skill set needs enhancement, then the requisite job training is the highest priority. Once again the city of Madison, particularly the progressive left (with the exception of Golden and a few others), focuses solely on housing, and ignores programs designed to ensure economic stability

In judging a candidate's commitment to battling poverty, I look not at the rhetoric but at the effectiveness of their position:

• There must be be acknowledgment that poverty is a major problem in Madison and that Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are not receiving equal benefit of Madison's educational and employment opportunities.
• There must be a commitment to involving the private sector in job development and training.
• A claim to be the candidate 'furthest' to the left does not cut it.
• A commitment to support low income housing is not sufficient.

Administration: While the mayor is the chief executive officer, every elected official is obligated to support clean government and efficient administration. That does not invite a meat-ax or employee-bashing approach to management. It represents a commitment to fair and equal hiring and personnel practices, quality management and open government. Time management is also an issue-the allocation of staff resources to support trolleys as opposed to combatting poverty, working with the schools, confronting discrimination, making sure there is public transportation for folks without cars.

Old and new endorsements:

District 1: Aaron Backer

District 5: Troy Thiel

Distrct 6: Marsha Rummel

District 8: Eli Judge

District 9: Paul Skidmore

District 10: Br1an Solomon

District 11: Chris Schmidt

District 12: Mike Basford

District 13: Julia Kerr

District 15: Vicky Selkowe (sorry for the previous spelling error)

District 18: Michael Shumacher

District 20: Gary Poulson

More to follow.

Comments

[John Brown]

Soglin's endorsement means next to nothing, especially in District 8. He's a middle-aged white man, who lost his last two elections, and has recently worked as a financial advisor and employee at Epic Systems. Who cares what he thinks?

[Paul]

For those who question if the only readers of this blog are open minded people, John Brown provides conclusive evidence that Waxing America is visited by narrow-minded bigots.

[On Wisconsin]

Apparently you care, John, if you're angry enough to post an ad hominum attack.

[bigot?]

Can I just point out that while Paul Soglin is calling people "bigots" for anonymously mocking him (I think "coward" is more appropriate than "bigot"), he did just endorse an all-white City Council. I'm just not sure he's in a position to be throwing around the "bigot" word, and I think this demonstrates his (like many white people) perception that African-Americans are unable to represent themselves or speak on their own behalf.

And his supposed criteria are show to be complete fabrications when you look at the race in the 8th district. Having seen both candidates' literature and online activity, Lauren Woods is the ONLY one talking about poverty and economic justice. It makes sense, since her opponent comes from suburban privilege and she grew up in the heart of the southside of Chicago.

I also bet that Marsha Rummel doesn't want and didn't ask for Paul Soglin's endorsement. Why would she? He got DESTROYED in that district in 2003. I guess the same thing goes for the 5th, 8th, 11th, and a few other districts where it was a blow-out in 2003.

[Another UW Student]

This is exactly right. Just look at the first list of endorsements and the incredibly narrow-minded comments of "UW Student" - either Judge or one of his close supporters. He claims that by talking about any other issue other than student safety (which, may I add, Lauren Woods as a woman on campus probably knows more about than Eli Judge ever will), Woods is somehow abandoning her district. Then Soglin says poverty is the only thing that matters to him, and endorses the (privileged, white) candidate that refuses to discuss poverty. How ya like them apples?

[Dan Sebald]

Well, toss out the trolley issue. The media has covered this issue far more than the attention it has gotten at common council. It seems few alders have made up their minds on that one. District 6, Marsha Rummel, has made her position clear on opposing trolleys, but I hope that isn't a significant reason for endorsing a candidate. If trolleys looked like an almost certainty and Paul were opposed, then maybe that would bump priority up a bit. But I don't see trolleys a near certainty at this stage; more like a strawman issue.

Combating poverty and working with schools are a significant CC oversight in the past couple years. The Sunday WSJ lead story is more evidence how Madison's educational system has been clobbered. (I wasn't real pleased with the elementary school referendum process either... note Paul's comment about educational opportunities and the fact the new school is far west side.) The city council and mayor should be raising Cain with state legislature and Doyle on that one. Unfortunately, few if any of the candidates Paul endorsed seem to be outspoken on that issue. It's simply that for some strange reason there are no politicos with that priority.

Public transportation? If the outpouring of community support for Metro at CC meetings hasn't convinced politicians, don't know what will. At least one and maybe more existing alders that Paul didn't endorse have been quite friendly to Metro and the non-automobile community.

Don't know what to say on the issue of poverty. Minimum wage increase? We've seen how vehemently opposed business is to that idea. Alder Bruer is probably the best alder when it comes to standing up for the lower economic class. I don't think the city council is silent or afraid to address this. (The African American community did show up for public testimony at city council on the Metro issue. In fact, I think their testimony was so influential along with that of a former alder that it may have re-instated a route, if I'm remembering correctly.) Paul seems to have presented the problem as good as anyone, at least on the micro scale. On the macro scale, some alders are very pro city and for mixed use, which I contend is also healthy for lower income communities.

I'd argue that there is simply too much going on with all the non-smart growth in Madison. Sprawl draws a lot of capital out of the city and someone will end up losing. (The majority of people driving into the city in the morning and out at the end of the day are taking pay checks along with them.) Unfortunately, as much as I dislike it, least represented social classes lose out. It's difficult to discuss job training when big issues like water quality and transmission lines and other issues brought on by growth require attention.

This is probably some of the best pool of candidates as there have been. Note that many of them have been very politically active. One problem is that District 10 includes Monroe/Dudgeon, a very politically active group which has the most viable candidates, yet they are so isolated from other parts of the district. What I mean by viable is that the person is familiar with political process, knows when to show up for public testimony, so on. So, in response to On Wisconsin's comment, the question isn't minorities being able to represent themselves, the problem is getting them involved in the political process.

Maybe the city should have a liaison program to get people from each neighborhood within a district more involved in the process. Or, now that I think of it, another approach would be to ask the mayor to appoint more people from certain districts onto various commissions. That would be a way of getting interaction with under-represented neighborhoods, i.e., the commission member can talk with neighborhood friends about issues, so on.

[Dan Sebald]

"as good as anyone"

Did I write that?!!

[Anonymous]

...because Eli Judge, an openly gay man, would never know what it's like to feel marginalized or threatened on campus. Please.

Also, does anyone else find it ironic that the attack dogs of Austin King, a rich, white guy from the Milwaukee burbs, have the cajones to call Eli Judge priveleged?

Ah, the irony.

I'm so glad I don't live in the 8th distrct.

[Lisa Subeck]

Paul,

Your endorsements seem to be all over the map philisophically. Considering the issues you identify as important, I just can't see any consistency within this group. I'd be curious to hear more about why you have chosen each of these individuals.

Just curious,
--Lisa

Paul Skidmore?!? You actually endorsed Paul Skidmore?!?

[David Remmele]

Paul
I find it very disappointing that immediately after you state "Asians not receiving equal benefit..." you immediately endorse the opponent of the first Asian-American to ever run for the Madison Common Council. Your concern for Madison's minorities would ring more true if you had at least talked to THUY before endorsing her opponent.