McNamara to form exploratory committee for 11th District Seat in Ohio Senate
This in via e-mail:
McNamara Will Explore Senate Run
Toledo City Council President says middle class families need a strong voice in Columbus
Toledo, OH – Democrat Joe McNamara announces today that he will form a committee to explore a campaign for the 11th District seat in the Ohio State Senate being vacated by Teresa Fedor. The Toledo City Council President will make a decision about whether to enter the May 4, 2010 Democratic Primary before the end of January.
“I’m taking this step because we need an effective advocate in Columbus who will stand up for our values and demonstrate leadership during these difficult times,” asserts McNamara. “Now, more than ever, we need public servants that seek common ground and pursue common sense strategies to fix government, promote job growth, and strengthen our middle class.”
First elected to Toledo City Council At-Large in a 2006 special election, McNamara was chosen as Council President by his colleagues in a unanimous, bipartisan vote in July 2009. In November, he was re-elected to City Council, receiving the most votes of any candidate on the Toledo ballot. He is also a member of the Executive and Central Committees of the Lucas County Democratic Party.
A partner in the downtown Toledo-based law firm of McNamara and Schaller, McNamara is a graduate of the University of Michigan and the New York University School of Law. Prior to his election to City Council, he served as a Trustee of the Toledo-Lucas County Public
Library system.
McNamara, 32, is a west Toledo homeowner and engaged to be married to Valerie Moffitt, a community development professional and attorney. The couple attends Christ The King Roman Catholic Church.
The full statement by McNamara is attached.
###
Statement By Joe McNamara Announcing State Senate Exploratory Committee
Today I am establishing a committee to explore a campaign for the Ohio Senate.
I’m taking this step because we need an effective advocate in Columbus who will stand up for our values and demonstrate leadership during these difficult times.
On Toledo City Council, I’ve fought for jobs and delivered for middle class families. I’ve worked to bring strategic vision to our economic development efforts, to establish new career training opportunities, and to promote job creation in high-tech sectors like clean energy.
As Council President, I’ve taken on the toughest challenges and brought people together to get things done. We confronted Toledo’s 2009 fiscal crisis with action – forging consensus around bipartisan budget solutions that put public safety first. We reduced the city’s
debt by $11.3 million. And we embraced efficiency and technology to save taxpayers millions more in the years ahead.
Now, more than ever, we need public servants that seek common ground and pursue common sense strategies to fix government, promote job growth, and strengthen our middle class. That’s the kind of Councilman that I have been and the kind of Senator I aspire to be.
In the coming weeks, I’ll be talking with people from across the district about what our communities need – and about what we should expect from our representatives in Columbus. I’ll also be working with Toledo’s Mayor-elect and members of Council to chart a responsible course for city government for 2010 and beyond.
By the end of January, I will make a judgment about where I can best be of service. But wherever that is, I pledge to continue working hard every day to build a better community.
Interesting…
I’ve also heard that Peter Ujvagi and Edna Brown (both of whom are term-limited) are interested in that position…
Should make for a lively primary….
November 20th, 2009 at 2:30 pmI suppose elected office is the only steady job in NW Ohio.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:30 pmAfter reading all of his accomplishments while a member of Toledo City Council, it is hard for me to believe that Toledo isn’t doing a little better than it is. It is easy to use words like strategic vision for economic development, promoting job creation in high tech sectors like clean energy, establishing new career training opportunities and strenghtening the middle class. But I guess Toledo would be in a real mess if he hadn’t done all that neat stuff.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:28 pm“the kind of Senator I aspire to be.” – Sounds like he has his mind made up so why do this silly little exercise.
If I hear put safety first one more time from his press releases I am going to scream. Obviously, the voters spoke rejecting the so called safety first plan so why continue to use such hallow rhetoric?
“I’m taking this step because we need an effective advocate in Columbus who will stand up for our values and demonstrate leadership during these difficult times.” – Can we infer that our current Senator is not providing this type of dynamic leadership?
Great points as usual Ron.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:36 pmAn exploratory committee takes the thoughts of others into consideration and makes it public that he may run. I don’t see a problem with transparency as far as possible actions, he could decide to run, he could decide to not run.
I don’t think mentioning the safety plan is a bad thing, coming up with solutions whether the voters approve them or not, does demonstrate an attempt, which is more than some could say. That old saying, “it is better to have tried and failed than to have never tried at all.”
Since the current Senator, Teresa Fedor is termed out, I don’t think you can infer that as a criticism, if he was running against her? Then you could but if he runs? He won’t be running against an incumbent.
I’ve heard the same things Maggie has, Edna Brown may run, she may not run. Peter Ujvagi may also run, though there has been talk about him running for something else even prior to McNamara’s exploratory committee announcement.
November 20th, 2009 at 4:56 pmI take it from many of Dave’s posts, he’s not a huge McNamara fan. Just an observation.
November 20th, 2009 at 5:37 pmThis is great news, can’t wait to see him in Columbus!
November 20th, 2009 at 6:35 pmToledo is in such great shape, now he can whip Columbus into shape!!
November 20th, 2009 at 7:43 pmTHIS IS AWESOME! As a conservative Republican this would be great if he left city council to go to CBus for the state Senate! You see the Democrat Party has about as much chance of taking control of the state Senate as much of a chance that I have dunking over LeBron James! McNamara will win then be put in the minority, and really have no shot at hurting the citizens of Toledo anymore then he has!
That is the great thing when the Democrat politicians in Toledo run for the State House or Senate. (At least until recently for the House) They are in the minority, and can’t hurt Toledo anymore!
November 20th, 2009 at 7:44 pmgood one Chad…..
November 20th, 2009 at 7:57 pmI don’t often agree with Dave Schulz, but what’s Joe exploring? Whether or not a Senate seat is open next year? The distance between Toledo and Columbus? How much it pays?
And who exactly is serving on this committee?
People form “exploratory committees” to spend money when they want to pursue big federal offices like, I don’t know, President.
If you’re going to jump ship for a new campaign before the votes are even certified in your last race, just say so. People aren’t stupid.
November 20th, 2009 at 8:40 pmI guess someone should have told Lee Fisher, Tyrone K. Yates, Carty Finkbeiner, Keith Wilkowski and others that they should not have wasted anyone’s time by having exploratory committees.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:02 pmI believe Lisa stated earlier in a post, an exploratory committee allows a politician to look into running into just about anything. They are allowed to raise money, to cover expenses for the committee and to get ready for a possible run. How those funds are used and what the law dictates, is another story I am not too sure of. He could use it to run for something else!
November 20th, 2009 at 9:21 pmI don’t know you David but I agree with you too on that last part about running for another office before you are even sworn in to your next term. This happened awhile back around here but can’t recall the person or office.
Chad, you fail to consider that another Demo will be appointed and moved along the chow line so the danger still exists…
November 20th, 2009 at 9:41 pmMaybe he should have just done what most of them do, talk about it behind the scenes, let people speculate while playing coy as to his possible intentions and then finally announce. It’s clear being honest about considering an opportunity isn’t appreciated by some.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:49 pmContinuing in the quest for those moments of rare honesty, there’s probably little McNamara would do that you would approve of Dave, and the same could be said for David as well.
It’s a given if McNamara does run and he wins the primary then goes on to the General and wins, that his council seat would be filled by appointment and it would be a Democrat who replaced him, then a special election for that seat.
If he does have the desire to go to the General Assembly, if he waits? Then he’d have to run against an incumbent which is not typically looked upon with favor, since Fedor is termed out? It will either be a new person or musical chairs.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:03 pmLisaRenee Says:
“I guess someone should have told Lee Fisher, Tyrone K. Yates, Carty Finkbeiner, Keith Wilkowski and others that they should not have wasted anyone’s time by having exploratory committees.”
Good point Lisa, it sure didn’t do wilko any good.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:04 pmMaybe it did, he didn’t win but he did get into the primary and it was a close election. He gave Toledo a choice, clearly, more decided they didn’t even want to make a choice but those who did care enough to vote can’t say they did not have two candidates who had different ideas on how to run Toledo to decide from.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:08 pmOh Lisa Renee, I’m actually supportive of McNamara’s run. I’m sure he’ll have very good ideas to contribute in Columbus.
I just have a visceral dislike for the kinds of media games that go on to try to wring out ever drop of attention possible. And I especially don’t like it when it’s done so sloppily.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:37 pmThen David, I stand corrected on the impression given.
I have the same dislike, but it also extends to the games played rather than honest disclosure.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:44 pmIt will help give the Blade something to occupy themselves with in the Spring….
November 21st, 2009 at 8:04 amI feel deceived once again. Another career Politician,if I had known I wouldn’t have voted for him,and IF he does run for another office before he finishes this term on council I won’t vote for him again EVER.
I am so sick of this Toledo Political Game I could just scream.I will campaign against him if he does this.
JOE, please don’t let your supporters DOWN.
November 21st, 2009 at 9:54 amI think Lisa’s comments in #16 reflect the political calculations for Joe McNamara at this time.
However, as a supporter, I have to say that I am disappointed since I have appreciated his work so far and have enjoyed his growth in the city council role. Rather than losing him into a legislature where his potential will be much more limited, I prefer having him stay here to carry out the work that we supported him to do.
I certainly would not have backed him in the council race had I known that he would be seeking to leave, and I can’t get rid of the feeling that we have been manipulated.
November 21st, 2009 at 10:14 amRub of the Green
That’s why I am so disturbed I feel MANIPULATED. I am so tired of feeling like that. I thought that maybe he and the incoming Mayor, since they are both educated, young, and eager to be sucessful they would bring some intelligent and “doable” ideas to the table in regards to our economy and all of the other issues that we are facing in this city today.
I HOPE that he finishes what he just committed himself too, BUT, it seems like we just have another career politican. TOO BAD
November 21st, 2009 at 10:40 amSure he would not do it at least now, but McNamara would be a great one to replace Kaptur!!
November 21st, 2009 at 12:47 pmRub of the Green and Miss Deejay – that is exactly why it makes sense to form an exploratory committee, because of what you just expressed. He has not announced he is running, only that he is considering it. If a number of people like you, who express valid concerns as to why you think he should not make a formal run for the Senate? I’m sure that will be a deciding factor.
I personally would rather have people be able to express their opinion in a manner that could impact the outcome rather than to have what normally happens occur. Which is not open transparency as is being done in this case.
November 21st, 2009 at 12:50 pmit is pretty disrespectful to the voters to be looking at another office before being sworn into your current one. mcnamara should have had this exploratory thing a year ago as all of these term-limited offices were understood to be happening way back when. he will create problems and expenses for the city by doing it this way.
whereas mcnamara is another of the publisher’s pet projects it could be brutal to see the blade attack ujvagi should they both decide to run for the senate seat.
let’s not forget that all this manuevering basicly comes down to this – who has the right seat, resume, backing, and momentum when marcy finally retires. every move that many of our current crop takes is always calculating how they relate to winning that seat.
November 21st, 2009 at 6:42 pmzimmy wrote:
If memory serves me correctly, Wade Kapszukiewicz was elected to City Council, in 2003, and had to file his petitions for county treasurer just a few hours before he was sworn in to the Council.
Maybe McNamara will be spared that embarrassment.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 amLisa
Your comments on this topic are so cogent! How profoundly sad!! So many people on this blog claim to crave transparency from politicians. We have a politician who is honest about a possible position that interests him. Instead of being elected or selected to continue as City Council President, and running for a new office from this more powerful position, McNamara is honest about his intentions, and removes homself from running to be President of City Council. And what to the nattering nabobs of negativity do? They criticize McNamara for being transparent!!
Heaven forbid we have an elected official who shows ambition! Do we criticize entrepreneurs who try a new business? Do we criticize businesses which change location? Do we criticize professionals or technicians who move from one firm to another?
This is another negative effect of term limits! Just when we get some people in office who really get a feel for how to serve us well, they must look for something else to do, whether it’s in the public sector of the private sector. I have no idea how much term limits affected McNamara’s decision to possibly pursue another office, but, as soon as he was elected to his second term, the clock started ticking!
And for those who believe that a high quality, intelligent person like Joe McNamara is doing this for the money he can earn in the public sector: do you know what a top-notch attorney in full-time private practice can earn, even in Toledo, Ohio? Those who claim that elected officials are serving for the money they make, tell much more about themselves when they make these charges, than they disclose about those whom they fallaciously attack!
November 22nd, 2009 at 2:57 pmThanks Dale, and as to the monetary aspect, no one interested in money would run for either the Ohio House or the Ohio Senate. McNamara would be better served staying at his part time Council position. When you factor in the expense of having to have a dual residency since it’s not possible to commute daily from Toledo to Columbus, the “they are doing it for the money” claim always makes me laugh.
McNamara could have just not said anything, he could have been re-elected as Council President, used that to keep his name out there and played the same game many do. I’m guessing those dissing him wanted him to not run for Council and have no elected position because he might decide to run for the Senate in 2010…Or? Not consider this opportunity and let the musical chairs game that happens from both parties just happen again.
With no disrespect to those currently in the Ohio House and Ohio Senate, all term limits have really meant for the most part is which part of the General Assembly will they now run for.
November 22nd, 2009 at 3:08 pmWell Lisa, we all shall see whether this is an “exploratory” committee or a “campaign organizing” group. I hope that you are correct, and I also hope that Joe McNamara reads these posts as much as he reads others on GCJ.
To be blunt, as much as I like and support McNamara for council and in particular for president during the coming term, I am disinclined to support his departure to the state house. I have no idea how others who have supported McNamara in the last couple of years will see this, but for me, it comes down to this: I was asked and agreed to support him for city council. I have every right to expect that in doing so, I was making a judgement about his value to city council. At no time during the recent campaign was there a hint that less than a month following the election, our highest vote getter FOR CITY COUNCIL would contemplate not fulfilling his term, nor his “due” as president of council, leaving us instead to the vagueries of other council members we may not have supported.
On a more reflective note, perhaps our “elected class” would do well to consider that their own political ambitions are the least appealing features of their character to the voters. Voters are not naive, but they are also weary with the seemingly endless evidence that those they elect are extraordinarily self absorbed by political ambition. While not expecting that any elected office is in effect a “life sentence,” I do think that voters have a tough time with disingenuous opportunism. In McNamara’s case, the “state house opportunity” inherent in the term limits of a number of incumbents was well known for a long time. To have campaigned hard for council and then to nearly simultaneously announce this exploration is a pretty clear example of the triumph of personal political ambition over the lofty rhetoric of the recent campaign.
I know that I am not alone among the many voters weary of this behavior among those we entrust with our votes.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:40 pmRub of the Green
I agree with your post #37. LIke I said before I think that he should finish, or should I say fufill his obligation to his supporters.
I don’t see anything wrong with advancement,but I do feel that he could have waited awhile at least until he was sworn in again.
In the future, I will address this issue of musical chair games that these elected officials play with the citizens of Toledo, I am SICK OF IT.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:21 pmMY BAD,I meant post #31.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:23 pmRub, there is a difference between “political ambition” and the desire for “public service” — there are those who let ambition get in the way but that’s not always the case.
Money is not what is driving McNamara, I think that’s clearly apparent. Nor is it just power alone, if it were that? He’d stay as Council President. He’d actually have more power there than he would starting out in the Senate, with at this point as was previously stated, a Republican majority.
The reality is, Toledo is in for another four years of Carty minus the histrionics. Most of the dreams and aspirations that would have been possible under a Wilkowski administration are not going to happen under a Bell administration.
I am a huge fan of Peter Ujvagi, who could very well decide to run for the Senate seat as well or he could decide to run for something else closer to home. What Ujvagi is going to do is not certain though it is fairly certain that Edna Brown is going to run for the Senate. Are we as a Democratic party hurt by having good choices?
I think not…So while I understand those who would prefer McNamara to remain on Council, I also understand why he is considering this and I do appreciate the fact that he’s being open about it. If he, Brown and Ujvagi all run for the Senate seat? No one can say that the voters did not have a good slate of candidates to decide from and if McNamara decides to not run or let’s say he does run and doesn’t win in the primary, that doesn’t hurt any of us. If he does decide to run and the voters want him to remain on Council? They’ll have the ability to say that with their vote…
The timing does suck, but that’s not something that is controllable, it’s how the terms happen, if he is going to do this, he needs to either do it now or wait until whoever is elected to the Senate either retires early or is termed out or face the wrath of the party by running against an incumbent…Which would also happen in the same cycle we are currently in which would mean he would either have to run right after being elected, or decide to sit out of politics for a year to be able to run for the Senate. This would mean basically to satisfy those of you upset about this, you don’t want him or any council member to run for the House or the Senate…until they are termed out…
I also don’t remember the same criticisms leveled at Matt Szollosi who after returning to Oregon City Council in 2005 announced he was running for the House in 2006…Szollosi was also the highest vote getter for Council…
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:16 pmLisa I’m not sure I buy your differentiation of service vs. ambition — that remains to be seen. Money and power are but two of ambition’s charms; perhaps more appealing is the game of playing two or three moves out. You have already noted that game in previous posts.
Worse, if McNamara believes as you apparently do that nothing reasonable is possible here since Bell rather than Wilkowski won, he is not the caliber of elected leader I have thought he is. I too was deeply sad that Wilkowski did not win, but I recognize that our pesky democratic process has lifted up a new leader for the next four years. Shall I and all other Wilkowski supporters throw in the towel? That option isn’t available to many, and frankly is no better than what we witness when the national or state opposition party does all that it can to thwart any chance of success by the president or the governor. We (including those we elect such as McNamara) have a duty to ourselves and our convictions to find ways to work with the Bell administration.
I have already agreed that you have aptly described the “musical chairs” dynamic created by term limits. And I understand that among the possible contenders, McNamara is one of the new players. He may indeed be the best on some number of issues, but I believe we need him in the position we just re-elected him to perform, and I also believe we need him to be council president.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 pmI didn’t say McNamara felt that way, I’m just pointing out the realities. The reality is, Bell won and he made it clear during the campaign he does not share some of the same goals or even philosophies. McNamara has already demonstrated he’d try to work with the present Mayor, I don’t think that’s a concern if he stays on Council.
I don’t view running for Senate as “throwing in the towel” I view it as exploring an opportunity where he feels his skills might be of better use to the area. Which as I already pointed out, from a timing standpoint, could never happen while he is on Council in a manner that would not involve announcing after an election.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:46 pmI also think generally, those who serve on Council and in the General Assembly are underpaid for what they do and the amount of time they put into the job.
Only those who live within a commute distance from Columbus could remotely come close to earning what is fair for a part time position.
To even attempt to run or consider running for either position is one that should not generate those believing they are going for either position for money or power. There are easier ways to get both…Those who serve in the General Assembly in our area right now do so at great personal cost and family sacrifice when you consider the time necessary to do the job right.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:54 pmIt appears that we must agree to disagree on this one. If nothing else, this discussion thread has done some exploring for Joe McNamara. And I think it has made clear that there are quite a few issues in play.
A big part of my concern is less about the new mayor than about a city council without McNamara as president. With his super-dominant vote count and his demonstrated skills and commitment to thoughtful policy work, he is a force much in need on this council now and in the next few years.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 pmI don’t disagree with you as to his current and possible role on Council being important. We’ll have to agree to disagree on it being wrong for him to consider other opportunities. I’d rather have him take this route, hear what others think and then decide rather than to just announce, that’s all I’m advocating for.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:11 pmYou make great points and rebuttals Rub. I also don’t agree that Bell is Carty minus the histrionics.
“Most of the dreams and aspirations that would have been possible under a Wilkowski administration are not going to happen under a Bell administration.” Yes, Toledo voters made a big mistake not turning to Wilkowski. NOT. Like Carty said today on 13, Bell was more likeable and down to earth, ie. not a typical politician. His calm cool leadership will do us well for the next four years. Keith is a nice guy but Bell just had a better connection with voters.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:16 pmLet’s make Waniewski council President.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:19 pmThat’s a nice theory Dave, until you run the actual numbers. The only parts of the City where Bell was preferred over Wilkowski by a high number of votes was the Central City.
For most of the city’s 24 Wards the election battle between Bell and Wilkowski was close, Ward 11 the two men differed by four votes and in Ward 12 only three votes separated them.
Wilkowski lost by 3,124 votes, it was the Central City Wards that overwhelmingly supported Bell, 3,097 more votes than Wilkowski. In Ward 6, the highest vote difference occurred with 795 more choosing Bell over Wilkowski. This means in the non-Central City Wards the vote difference between Bell and Wilkowski was 27 votes according to the unofficial tabulation.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:21 pmWaniewski has not expressed an interest and it’s doubtful that after what happened when the Democratic majority let Ludeman have it that would ever happen again.
I’m guessing it’s more likely it would be Wilma Brown.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:26 pmJust being sarcastic about Waniewski, he has no chance but would be great. Nonetheless, Bell won however you interpret the results. He was very likeable to the black community and equal with Wilko who should have done better in those non-Bell wards. Whoever was elected would have a bear of a job and I doubt some of the “new ideas” Wilko had would have done much. Most of his ideas about solar / alternative energy are advancing well with the public / private partnerships.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:54 pmThere was more to Wilkowski than the alternative energy aspect but? That’s kind of a moot point now, and while I don’t disagree that no matter where the votes came from, Bell won, I think it’s important to note that in many parts of Toledo, it was a close decision for voters as to who they wanted. With the exception of the Central City, Toledo was fairly torn on who they wanted to be Mayor.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:57 pmLisa
All of your statements on this thread make so much sense.
The issue that no one wants to touch is the ridiculous imposition of term limits to any office! No one is mentioning that McNamara himself is term limited. Let’s say he doesn’t run in 2010, or he is defeated in a tough Democratic Primary. He’s off Toledo City Council after the 2013 election, even if an overwhelming majority of Toledoans believe that McNamara is the best Toledoan to ever serve on City Council!
That’s what term limits get you!! Most posters here state that McNamara is really good on City Council, and has been a really good City Council President. Artificial, legally-imposed term limits, limit the right of voters to choose the best people to represent them. Why shouldn’t a good public servant continue on City Council for 20 or 30 years? There have ALWAYS been term limits. If an elected official screws up, constituents vote them out of office. We can even recall them in mid-term! That’s the only kind of term limits there should ever be!!
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:19 pmGlad to touch the untouchable here! We have had term limits ever since we had our second election.
The imposition of artificial limits on the voters’ options only satisfies those who don’t fully trust the power of the election process. In recent times, proponents of term limits have also tended to resent government and to appear to favor anything that increases disarray in local government. This sort of guarantees that their negative view of government is fulfilled by assuring that the even the best leadership must leave regardless of the voters’ preferences.
I think it’s time to re-open the term limit law.
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:39 amYes, let’s tighten it to terms/years in the legistlature not just one house….
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:11 amHere we disagree. I believe we should eliminate the arbitrary imposition of time (i.e., term) limits.
Term limits (other than the election process itself) create far too many consequences that are not in the public interest in comparison to any benefit claimed. In a sense, this entire discussion thread debates matters created by the existence of arbitrary term limits. Term limits and multiple levels of government are creating an environment that promotes disarray. With few exceptions, the comments on this blog come from McNamara supporters who are upset that we will potentially lose his leadership even though he received an extraordinary number of votes.
This is as good an example of any for why term limits are not in our interest.
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:26 amI agree that term limits can not always end up creating the best result. That said, one of the issues related to term limits is incumbents and party politics. Let’s use McNamara as an example, let’s say there were no term limits so that an incumbent, Teresa Fedor would be the example in this case, once elected to the Ohio Senate could remain there without limits.
You would be expecting those within the same party to challenge an incumbent, which is not very well accepted and the incumbent would almost always have an advantage over the challenger when it comes to connections and fundraising abilities.
That is why you typically only see members of the same party running for a House or Senate position when term limits have come into play or the position opens up because the incumbent has either retired or taken another elected position.
Ask yourselves when the last time a local House or Senate leader was defeated in the primary by an opponent of the same party…The same could be said for Toledo City Council, Ludeman termed out, he then came back…Shultz will term out…Her terming out and Frank Szollosi not running for re-election is how Martinez made it on Council.
Do we want electeds to be life long position holders? That is the basic question once you acknowledge that incumbency equals power. It’d be wonderful to have voters made an educated decision each time on who would be the best candidate for that particular election position, but how you change party politics to make challenging an incumbent from your own party acceptable would be difficult.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:40 pmAh my very savvy friend Lisa. Your comments reflect the current (or perhaps better put, most recent) wisdom. It certainly can be tempting to forget the first couple of hundred years of our experiment in representative democracy when for the most part the only limits were the length of a term and the abilities of the candidates and parties to win election.
Although incumbency does equal power, and it certainly can perpetuate marginal elected performance (case in point: more than a few of our current city council, which takes us back to why we need McNamara to serve there), from time to time the voters rise up. The 1980 election comes to mind, and I think in some ways, the 2009 Toledo municipal election may turn out to be the same kind of moment. At these moments voters’ weariness with the insiders and careerists overcomes incumbency and party.
It seems to me that we have seen too many high performing electeds “termed out” to justify continuing our current system of term limits. And, I am willing to trust that voters (yes, even Toledo voters) will rally to assert themselves when they see too much insider or party influence. (It is arguable that Wilkowski’s closeness with the LCDP cost him against a lifelong democrat running as an independent.)
I for one am willing to trust that our elections themselves represent the best form of term limits. And I believe that voters are especially sensitive to and upset with the political machinations that term limits encourage. Proponents of term limits in recent decades were mostly in favor of limiting government in general, not improving government’s performance. Their voices would never be raised in praise of high performers who have maintained the confidence of their constituents over time. Although it’s cliche, I think we can quickly get agreement that term limiting Franklin Roosevelt during the war would have been very bad indeed.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:21 pmIf we actually followed the design of our government, parties would not be in control, but? That’s not our reality, so we are stuck with either term limits at times pushing out those who deserved to stay versus term limits being the only way a few incumbents who shouldn’t have stayed leave.
In part because the political party system is designed to not allow those within your own party to be challenged. I wouldn’t mind seeing that change, it’s similar to the philosophy I have in believing primaries within the party are good for us as opposed to the party mentality of squelching a primary opponent from the same party.
I was dismayed at how few people even heard of the Apportionment Board or even realized how much power whichever party holds that majority has on influencing electoral outcomes. That’s why I completely understand those who oppose term limits and I agree with them in theory but I also understand how term limits do create more “new blood” than leaving it up to voters.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:30 pmIt is certainly true that from the outset of our republic, our greatest elected leaders loudly complained of the influence of parties in politics.
I think we have beaten this issue into the ground for now, and still we have the problem of whether McNamara will serve the post he sought and was elected resoundingly to complete.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:53 pmDidn’t he just get re-elected for council? He really should focus on that position. I’m sure the people who voted for him to be on council feel betrayed.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:06 pmtranparency from macnamara on this issue would have been him telling voters while he was running for council that he was considering a run for the senate as well. i supported him in his run and as noted by another here would expect him to honor that commitment.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:32 pmThat’s only if he planned to do this when he was running for Council. I don’t believe he ran for election with the belief he was going to even consider the Senate at this time, circumstances changed and once again, an exploratory committee is not the same as announcing you are running.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:52 pmI know that this is somewhat off of the original topic, but I feel so strongly that term limits are bad government!
In the Ohio General Assembly, no one may serve in either the House of Representatives or the Senate for more than 8 consecutive years. Former State Senator Linda Furney was first elected before term limits. She was dismayed when term limits became law. She often said that she really started to learn her job as a state legislator around 5-6 years into the job. Furney stated that it was sad to remove a state legislator via artificial term limits just when they were getting to know how to get things done.
Removing experienced legislators leaves a void — a power vacuum. Who fills that power vacuum? The answer is twofold. One group is those who make up the aides to legislators. These aides tend to move from one legislator to another as new people replace former members of the Ohio General Assembly. The other group empowered by term limits is everbody’s favorite group of people — lobbyists. Since legislators are term limited, most legislators lack experience. They turn to experienced staff and lobbyists from groups who support them for expertise.
I guess this is just what the geniuses who devised term limits were after. Take power away from elected officials who are directly responsoble to the voters, and put that power into appointed staffers and lobbyists for the already powerful special interests. Brilliant!!
November 24th, 2009 at 10:05 pmDale, I can’t disagree with you that is a valid point against term limits. It does however lead back to one of my questions, do we want lifelong elected officials for the same positions, there are advantages to seniority, not as much in the General Assembly but in Congress where seniority impacts committee assignments.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:10 pmLisa,
There are no term limits in Congress.
I understand your concerns about lifelong elected officials. I prefer those who want to become lifelong elected officials to the system we have at the state and local levels now because of term limits. Currently, the real power of stae and local government is in the hands of lifelong unelected legislative aides and unelected lobbyists for special interests. How’s that working out?
However secure elected officials feel they are, any elected official can be voted out of office. Incumbency does not guarantee re-election. Just ask Toledo’s last two mayors! I’m old enough to remember when no one thought that Thomas Ludlow “Lud” Ashley would ever lose his seat in Congess. And Lud was beaten by a totally unknown Ed Webber, who, himself, served only one term!
There will always be power brokers. Do we want those with power to be the elected officials over whom voters can exercise some control? Or do we want the power brokers to be those we cannot control at all: legislative aides and lobbyists?
In this post, I haven’t even touched upon the fact that many elected officials do their jobs really well! Why should we, as voters, not be able to keep someone in office who is doing an exceptional job? I just don’t get it?
Terminate term limits!
End them now!
November 25th, 2009 at 11:40 amBTW…
Lud Ashley made a small fortune after he was defeated for Congress. He made much more money than he ever could have from his Congressional salary. How, you may ask?
Lud had served on, and been the Chair of, the House Banking Committee for many years before his defeat. He was hired by the banking industry to be a lobbyist!!!
November 25th, 2009 at 2:34 pm