Thursday, March 7, 2013

"Hey, Dems, it really was the issues."


 Donkey lost this round

     John Etheredge, who is the first Republican to win a seat on the Board of Supervisors since 1958, beat Democrat Terry Dahms 51-48%  (192 votes) in what many are referring to as an upset. Many seem to believe that it was low voter turnout that was the cause of the unexpected outcome. While it is true that registered Democrats outnumber register Republicans by a greater than 2:1 margin, we believe there was more behind Etheredge’s win than the fact that less than 7% of possible votes were cast; the candidates’ positions on two major issues also had a major influence: the proposed new 195 bed, $43.6 million jail and the rezoning and subdividing of the Dooley property in Newport Township; Etheredge opposes both.


     Terry Dahms was on the 'wrong' side of the two local issues about which voters currently feel most strongly:  he favors approval of the Newport subdivision and supports the proposed new jail plan, having, as the Press Citizen put it in their March 7 editorial, “come around“ on this issue. One wonders if Dahms came around because he planned to run for Stutsman’s seat on the Board and wanted the support of the other Johnson County Democratic office holders, or whether he came around because he was truly convinced that the county needs a $43.6 million new facility. As recently as last October he privately expressed disapproval of the plan as it then stood, with Court House renovation being part of the same package as jail construction. One must support a candidate strongly to want to put a sign up on one’s property. Seeing so few signs for Terry means that some people who usually take Democrats’ signs were conflicted about this election.  At the public hearing on the jail held at the Court House a few weeks ago, farmers in the audience were ‘doing the math’ when they heard about the dollars per acre the jail bond issue would add to their property taxes. Dahms didn’t win a single rural precinct; a tie in Solon (42 votes - 42 votes) was the closest he got. Etheredge carried most of them with margins from the 60%'s to a high of 87% (Washington Township). Get-out-the-vote efforts can't do much in the face of margins like that.

     Look at the returns for Newport Township: 70% for Etheredge; Dahms was out of step with his own neighbors on the rezoning/subdividing question.  The Dooley rezoning was clearly opposed by Etheredge while Dahms was absurdly timid on the matter. Dahms is chairperson of the Planning and Zoning Commission and recused himself when the Commission was voting on the rezoning application, apparently because he was running for Stutsman’s Supervisor seat. There’s no conflict of interest in his being on P&Z and taking a vote on a matter he would have to vote on if he were to become a Supervisor. It appeared to many of us that Dahms favored the rezoning but didn’t say so until late in the campaign for fear of losing votes, not only in Newport Township but in the urban areas where urban sprawl matters to an educated populace.

     Democratic candidates should follow the Democratic County platform. We can't even find the 2012 edition on the JC Dems web site (possibly an indicator of party leaders' indifference  toward it?), but the county platform is quite stable and the 2008 one is pretty specific about preserving farmland and stopping urban sprawl.

                               http://www.jcdems.org/resources/JCPlatform2008Final_a.pdf
                                                            (See points 19 & 32)

     The voters have been hearing about nothing but elections and voting for months. They were surely aware of this one. In our case one of us was swayed to vote Republican for the first time in her life (and with little intention of ever doing so again) because of the two candidates’ very different stands. The other voted Democrat only out of friendship and loyalty – despite disagreeing on the issues. Many people who ordinarily vote Democratic were probably sufficiently conflicted – feeling a duty to vote for the Democrat but agreeing with the Republican’s positions – that they probably simply decided to stay out of it altogether by not voting.

     Making calls to remind people to vote (the JC Dems robocalling was in full swing) and mailing out ballot request forms for early voting aren't going to do any good if the candidate's positions on the issues people care about don't match their wishes. Some of the people to whom you're giving ballot request forms just might use them to vote for 'the other guy'.

Happy Johnson County Elephant

Sad Johnson County Donkey


Carol deProsse
Caroline Dieterle
 

3 comments:

  1. Terry recused himself from the P&Z vote on advice from the county attorney's office. Disagree with him if you will, and the people have spoken, but please don't question his integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A Democrat all my adult life, I voted for Mr. Etheredge and found his slim win to be a breath of fresh air, at least initially. I've become so unhappy with some of the supervisors' name-calling and childish public behavior that I had to vote for anyone other than another candidate put forth by the local Democratic central committee. I assume there were at least few others who voted that way for the same reasons I had. Bob Elliott, Iowa City

    ReplyDelete
  3. We didn't qquestion his integrity, John, (why you always leap to that conclusion.) We said he didn't have to recuse himself and he didn't. The County Attorney is wrong on the law on this one (and we're not questioning her integrity.)

    ReplyDelete