The Future vs Fairness

Ms. Susan Stimpson, Republican Board of Supervisors candidate for the Falmouth District, has decided not to participate in the Bloggers Forum. On the blog page http://bloggersforum09.blogspot.com/ the notation, "Quit 9/18" was posted next to her name. It was inappropriate to use such a term and it was also inappropriate not to provide an explanation of her decision. The term has been removed and below is the reason Ms. Stimpson provided for her decision:

"I have decided to withdraw from the Bloggers Forum scheduled for
September 30th. The most recent campaign finance reports, released on
the 15th, shows that two of the primary organizers of the event and
Blogger panelists are paid staff, listed as campaign managers and
consultants, to one of my opponents' (Mark Osborn) campaign. This is
an unfortunate situation which raises legitimate concern regarding the
fairness of the event. The obvious conflict of interest and ethical
ambiguities this presents has made me reconsider my participation."

Mr. Colin Brehm and Mr. Eric Martin, who are forum panelists, are working on Mr. Osborn's campaign. As for myself I have provided donations to two of the candidates in Stafford which have been publicly disclosed. If someone wants an explanation for those donations feel free to drop me a line. However, the purpose of this post is to address the issue of, "fairness."

Over the past two days I've received a crash course in the current state of Stafford politics by way of e-mail exchanges and perusing blog posts. This process brought back memories of a family vacation to New England with two pre-pubescent off-spring in the back seat going at it. Frankly, the interaction between my children was a bit more interesting but it is still not one of my fondest memories of parenthood.

The exchanges were recriminations regarding events that cannot be changed and a lot of inside baseball that Mr. & Mrs. Joe Q. Public couldn't care less about. Neither side in the exchanges discussed issues faced by Stafford County or a vision of the future. And yes they got personal.

Under the circumstances one may feel justified in questioning the "fairness" of a forum where one could expect such a line of discussion to continue. It is my hope that this level of discussion has ended and we can get back to debating issues. The fact is boycotting public forums based on the organization hosting the event; or who will be asking the questions, is not new. I get a sense that other candidates are having the same concerns. My response to all of them is welcome to politics.

There are no "fair" forums. Most groups like the Chamber of Commerce or Committee of 500 have agendas. Any person who asks a question has an agenda or a position on the subject on which they are asking the question. If elected you are to represent all your constituents, whether they supported you or not, and you had better be prepared to address concerns, answer tough questions, and face hostile audiences if you expect to get anything done.

As elected officials we do not have the opportunity to pick, when, where, who, or what kind of questions we may be asked. As a candidate any forum is an opportunity to make your case, to test your positions, and just maybe learn something new.

I addressed this point in a previous blog posting:

A dose of reality a day is a good thing--

“Illusions commend themselves to us because they save us pain and allow us to enjoy pleasure instead. We must therefore accept it without complaint when they sometimes collide with a bit of reality against which they are dashed to pieces.”

Sigmund Freud

It is human nature for us to associate with those who hold the same ideas and opinions as we do. However, an elected representative makes no greater mistake when they bask in the accolades of their friends and supporters only to discover that those supporters don’t represent the majority view.

As an elected representative you must broaden your associations to include ALL your constituents. While accolades are great for the ego accepting and learning from criticism, will serve you and your constituents better in the end. This is not to say that you must sacrifice your views. People cannot expect that you will agree with their position on a particular issue but they should expect that their position would be given a fair hearing. The goal is not to expect agreement but rather understanding.

Seek out those who take issue with you. You will find your suppositions tested, see an issue from another point of view, and may come away with a better solution. This is what the democratic process is all about.

Or as the great Edmund Burke put it more succinctly, "He that wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper."

I sincerely hope that we can leave the playground and start focusing on what is important for the future of Stafford and Spotsylvania Counties . No one is interested in candidates' comfort. People want to see if their elected officials can hold-up when faced with the tough question and hear their vision of the future. My question to the candidates is--How will you lead? You need to set the example. If you are looking for "fairness" you may want to reconsider public office.