The Post editorial page started going after MCEA back in February, trying its best to affect the appeal of the union's support. Well, the primary returns are in and the endorsements can be compared. So who had the better record - the Post or MCEA?
The newspaper and the union disagreed on fourteen positions. Here are the results of their choices.
So when the Post and MCEA went head-to-head, the union won in 11 of 14 races.
Here are their records from 2006 through 2009.
So during this period, when the Post and MCEA made opposing endorsements, the union won in 8 of 11 races. This means that the result of the Post's anti-MCEA campaign has been to increase the union's comparative winning percentage.
Showing posts with label Apple Ballot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apple Ballot. Show all posts
Monday, September 20, 2010
The Post vs. MCEA: Primary Results
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Ballots, Ballots Everywhere
MCEA is the acknowledged master of precinct day ballot handouts with its famous Apple Ballot, but now several other groups are getting into the act today. Will it mean anything?
We have heard that six groups will be distributing ballots listing their endorsed candidates today: Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35, SEIU Local 500, Casa in Action, the Volunteer Fire Fighters, the Sierra Club and Progressive Neighbors.
Here’s a copy of the Volunteers’ ballot.
Here’s the District 15 version of SEIU’s Purple Ballot.
Here’s the Sierra Club poll piece.
Here’s a copy of Casa in Action’s ballot.
And here’s Progressive Neighbors’ ballot.
Just because these organizations intend to distribute ballots does not mean they will actually do so. Montgomery County is a huge jurisdiction with 246 voting precincts. A group that wishes to cover them all would ideally field three shifts of two volunteers each, or 1,476 total distributors. Not even MCEA, which maxes out at somewhere around 500-600 distributors, can get anywhere close to that number. Alternatively, a group could simply leave its ballots on the precinct tables, but that almost guarantees they will not be read.
Some of the above groups may be able to deploy several dozen volunteers if they work really hard. Others may only be able to send a couple dozen, and yet others are probably just blowing smoke. But some of these “little Apples” will get passed out. The big question is where. More than one ballot group will be targeting the District 14 Senate race in an effort to get rid of incumbent Rona Kramer. (The Volunteers are the only organization listed here who endorsed her.) But that district may not have many members of these groups. This sort of unpredictability makes it hard to believe that any ballot other than the Apple will have a big impact on any state legislative race.
But there is one contest in which geography is irrelevant: Council At-Large. Every ballot handed out in every precinct has the potential for affecting that race. Here are the at-large candidates who are listed on each of the ballots.
Apple Ballot
Marc Elrich
George Leventhal
Hans Riemer
Becky Wagner
Other Ballots
Marc Elrich: Police, SEIU, Sierra Club, Casa, Neighbors (5)
Hans Riemer: Police, SEIU, Sierra Club, Volunteers, Casa (5)
Nancy Floreen: Police, SEIU, Casa (3)
George Leventhal: Police, SEIU, Casa (3)
Duchy Trachtenberg: Sierra Club, Neighbors (2)
So if these ballots have any impact at all on the at-large primary, it is likely to benefit Elrich and Riemer (who is the only at-large candidate listed on the Volunteers’ ballot) and damage Trachtenberg. We may not be talking about a lot of affected votes, but there does not have to be very many. On primary election night in 1998, Steve Silverman led Pat Baptiste for the fourth at-large seat by just 640 votes. In 2002, challenger George Leventhal defeated incumbent Blair Ewing for the fourth at-large seat by 1,140 votes. With Riemer looking strong, Floreen holding steady, Trachtenberg having problems and Becky Wagner going negative, anything can happen in this election. And any factor that swings a few hundred votes here or there could make the difference.
Monday, September 13, 2010
More From MCEA (Two Updates)
This kind of mailer is why so many of MCEA's endorsed candidates are mad at them. The title of this mailer, which arrived in District 19 on Saturday, is "See Who Teachers Have Recommended." But it is only a partial list of their recommendations which includes just the candidates who have paid to be in the mailer. Becky Wagner is the only at-large candidate to appear, potentially leading readers to believe that she is MCEA's only at-large endorsee given the title of the mailer. We are hearing serious rumbles of a backlash by MCEA's own endorsed candidates after the primary.
Update: Based on what we are hearing, we are questioning whether all of these candidates have paid to appear in the mailer.
Update 2: Council Member Nancy Navarro has told us that she has never paid MCEA but she is in the mailer.
East County Apple Mailer
This mailer was produced not by MCEA, but by Council Members Nancy Navarro and Valerie Ervin and at-large candidate Hans Riemer, all of whom have endorsed each other and all of whom are on the Apple Ballot.
Thursday, September 09, 2010
MCEA Mails, Politicians Wail
MCEA’s political program started going into high gear last week. Some politicians like it, others hate it, but everybody is talking about it. And of course, that means MPW is talking about it too! (Would you expect anything less?)
MCEA is best-known for its Apple Ballot, a poll piece mailed to Democratic voters and distributed by MCEA members at the polls. The Apple Ballot prompted us to call MCEA the “800 lb Gorilla of MoCo Politics” in our very first blog post. But MCEA does much, much more for its endorsees. Much of it is financed with its members’ PAC contributions, which is the conventional model used by everyone else. But some of it is financed with money contributed by the candidates themselves.
In a pair of emails sent to us by our omni-present spy network, MCEA political strategist Jon Gerson explained the program to the union’s endorsed candidates. (Both are marked “confidential.”) Here’s Gerson discussing the Apple mailing as well as other programs on July 5:As in 2006, MCEA is once again planning to direct mail the die-cut Apple Ballot (19 different versions, based upon the Council/Legislative District) to every Democratic Primary voter in Montgomery County. In addition, over the past few weeks, we have been working closely with individual/team campaigns who have contacted us to explore other ways to help ensure voters in their district are aware of our support. While every candidate will be featured on the Apple Ballot, the nature and character of any additional outreach (e.g. supplemental mail pieces, neighborhood letters, phone banking, lawn signs for teachers’ homes, coffees, photo/graphic support, etc.) will be unique to each candidate. If you have any questions regarding our program/priorities or want to discuss working together on a specific initiative, please contact me as soon as possible.
Gerson went into more detail in another email to the endorsed candidates on August 24:This year, MCEA will once again direct mail the die-cut Apple Ballot (19 different versions, based upon the Council/Legislative District) to every Democratic Primary voter in Montgomery County. The entire cost of this mailing (which is considerable, as its unique shape requires processing by hand and delivery to each post office in the county) is paid for solely by our members’ PAC contributions; no outside funds are associated with the cost of producing/mailing/distributing the Apple Ballot. In addition, our members cover the cost of those die-cut Apple Ballots which are distributed at the polls on Election Day (including the Early Voting sites)…
To his credit, Gerson is being very direct with the candidates. MCEA is doing a large number of things with member PAC money alone: Apple Ballot mailings, Apple Ballot poll distribution and ads in the Gazette and other publications. But supplemental help was to be given at the option of the candidates, and was to be financed by the candidates themselves. Translation: if you want extra, come to us, work it out and pay for it. Every endorsed candidate was given this opportunity. Some took it, while others – some of whom were intimidated by the Post – did not. In fact, in their endorsement calls to candidates, Washington Post editorial writers asked point-blank whether MCEA-endorsed candidates intended to contribute to MCEA’s PAC and strongly hinted that those who did would probably not be supported by the Post.
MCEA is promoting our recommended candidates to key voters in other ways as well. We have purchased advertisements in the upcoming issues of Bethesda Magazine (see attached), Washington Jewish Week and other targeted publications, which are scheduled to hit homes/newsstands next week. In addition, our interactive ads on Gazette.net (Home and Montgomery pages) will begin appearing this coming Wednesday, as visits/traffic to the site increases during the election season. Finally, included in each of the 266,000 copies of the September 8th print edition of the Gazette newspapers will be MCEA’s full-color, eight page supplement insert, featuring articles/photos on education, our recommended candidates and other information of interest to voters.
In addition to promoting all recommended candidates, we have been working closely with individual/team campaigns who have contacted us to explore other ways to help ensure voters in their district are aware of our support. While every candidate will be featured on the Apple Ballot, the nature and character of any additional outreach (e.g. supplemental mail pieces, extensive voter id calling, targeted email outreach, social media advertising, neighborhood letters, phone banking, lawn signs for teachers’ homes, coffees, photo/graphic support, etc.) are unique to each candidate. Including the Apple Ballot, MCEA will be sending out over 350,000 pieces of direct mail in the upcoming Primary Election campaign. If you have any questions regarding our program/priorities or want to discuss working together on a specific initiative, please contact me as soon as possible.
So last week, MCEA mailers started going out. Here’s a version from District 39.
Delegate Charles Barkley (D-39) and at-large council candidates George Leventhal, Marc Elrich and Hans Riemer are not in the mailer even though they were endorsed by MCEA.
And here’s a version from District 16.
District 1 Council Member Roger Berliner and at-large council candidates George Leventhal, Marc Elrich and Hans Riemer are not in the mailer even though they were endorsed by MCEA. House challenger Ariana Kelly received a bigger picture than Delegates Susan Lee and Bill Frick.
This week, MCEA purchased an eight-page insert in the Gazette. It contained four articles on MCPS and education topics, a quarter-page listing of every MCEA-recommended candidate and advertisements touting the union’s School Board candidates, Council Member Marc Elrich (two ads), County Council candidates Craig Rice (two ads), and Becky Wagner (two ads including a half-page on the back), Senators Jennie Forehand and Mike Lenett, Senate candidate Karen Montgomery (two ads), Delegate Anne Kaiser and Delegate candidates Bonnie Cullison (two ads), Shane Robinson and Ariana Kelly. Presumably, these candidates plus those listed in the mailers paid for their placement. But when we asked them, two candidates who were not School Board Members or state-wide candidates said they had not paid.
Those politicians who have not been supported by the Teachers are predictably resentful. But even some who have been endorsed despise the program. They believe that the candidate-financed mailings may be perceived by the public as evidence that MCEA favors some of its endorsed candidates over others, or perhaps has not endorsed some whom they have indeed endorsed. One angry MCEA endorsee told of getting a phone call from a relative who received one of MCEA’s mailers, saw that the endorsee was not listed, and asked if the Teachers had retracted their endorsement.
Have you ever bought a new car? First, there is a base price for your model (and different base prices for sub-models). Then, there are prices for add-ons, like mud flaps, stripes, floor mats, GPS, satellite radio and more. All of these prices are negotiable, including your trade-in price and even a loan interest rate. So if you know what you’re doing, you haggle over all of these items and see if you can strike a deal. That’s what MCEA’s program resembles.
But no one wants to go through the hassle of being a car buyer, especially not harried, insecure and paranoid politicians. Here is the typical mindset of a politician dealing with an endorsing organization.Are you with me? If you are, great. Give me money and help me get more money. You don’t have a lot of money? Then get me bodies, or door-knock, or do an independent expenditure. If you give me a little extra, great, but don’t give anyone else more than you’re giving me. If you’re not with me, I’m disappointed, but don’t endorse my opponent. And if you do endorse my opponent, then don’t help them go negative on me or I’ll never forgive you.
The above represents the level of sophistication of 90% or more of the candidates in this county. And that’s the G-rated version!
MCEA’s response to grumbles from politicians, whether endorsed or not, about their political program is essentially “Tough Twinkies!” And it’s their right to say that and to run their program any way they wish. But politicians don’t deal with any other organization that acts this way, and they’ll remember it – likely at a very inconvenient time for the union.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
MCEA's Ad in Bethesda Magazine
This is part of MCEA's campaign to maintain its standing with the public and fortify the value of the Apple Ballot.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Council At-Large Geography, Part Three
MCEA’s Apple Ballot had a lot of success in 2006, beating both the Post and Gazette endorsements on win rate in contested races. What impact did it have specifically on the at-large race?
Last time, incumbent George Leventhal and challengers Marc Elrich and Duchy Trachtenberg were listed on the Apple Ballot. Incumbents Nancy Floreen and Mike Subin and a host of lesser challengers were not.
Here are the vote totals of the above five candidates in 2006.
Leventhal: 52,364
Elrich: 47,574
Trachtenberg: 46,975
Floreen: 44,580
Subin: 38,896
And here are the precinct vote totals for these five candidates. While MCEA does mailers on behalf of its endorsees, the Apple Ballot’s main effectiveness comes from its distribution at polling places.
Leventhal: 46,073
Elrich: 41,778
Trachtenberg: 41,334
Floreen: 38,973
Subin: 34,066
The above data illustrates that Leventhal finished first by a comfortable margin, Elrich and Trachtenberg were virtually tied after him, and Floreen trailed those three but beat Subin significantly. The Apple Ballot was just one factor in this performance, but it was a factor. Consider that the Post endorsed Leventhal, Floreen, Subin and Bo Newsome while the Gazette endorsed Floreen, Subin, Newsome and Reggie Felton.
The key to understanding the Apple Ballot is knowing that is not equally effective in all areas of the county. To gauge its effectiveness, we calculated the combined vote totals of its three at-large endorsees – Leventhal, Elrich and Trachtenberg. They ran three very different campaigns. Leventhal stuck to the same pro-growth positions that he had as a member of the 2002 End Gridlock team and had lots of money. Elrich and Trachtenberg ran on platforms of limiting development. Elrich had lots of volunteers and little money. Trachtenberg had lots of money and few volunteers. The only thing that all three shared was their support by many labor unions, and more specifically, presence on the Apple Ballot. We calculated their combined votes as a percentage of all at-large votes cast to serve as a proxy for Apple influence. This is an admittedly imperfect statistic, but it does produce some interesting results.
Following are the combined precinct vote percentage of the Apple at-large candidates by Congressional District, State Legislative District, Council District and locality.
Overall, Leventhal, Elrich and Trachtenberg combined to receive 44.0% of all votes for at-large candidates cast at polling places, but there are WIDE disparities across the county. The Apple’s popularity was greatest in Downcounty areas like Takoma Park (58.3% of at-large votes), Downtown Silver Spring (48.9%), Kensington (47.7%), Bethesda (46.0%) Chevy Chase (45.6%) and Potomac (45.2%). These are mostly politically liberal areas where education is usually the number one issue.
Takoma Park is an outlier because of the popularity of former City Council Member Marc Elrich, who was a strong supporter of Trachtenberg in 2006 as well as today. (If Vladimir Putin ran on a slate with Elrich, he would win in Takoma Park). What makes Takoma Park’s respect for the Apple in the at-large race even more remarkable is that the city voted to eject Apple-endorsed Senator Ida Ruben in favor of Jamie Raskin even as it led MoCo in Apple fealty at the county level.
The Apple was weakest in Upcounty areas like Burtonsville (37.0%), Clarksburg (37.7%), Germantown (37.8%), Laytonsville (38.5%), Poolesville (39.6%), Montgomery Village (39.7%) and Damascus (39.8%). Non-coincidentally, Nancy Floreen and Mike Subin tended to perform well in these areas. Upcounty is more politically moderate than Downcounty and a few precincts even lean to the right. This should be cautionary information for MCEA’s efforts to elect Craig Rice to Council District 2.
The Apple’s skewed success rate is going to have an impact on the 2010 at-large race. We’ll explore that further as we analyze the individual candidates later in the series.
Tomorrow, we’ll present the overall precinct results for the four at-large winners in 2006 as well as Mike Subin.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Post Endorsements Challenge the Apple
The Post has released its endorsements for County Council and they are a direct challenge to MCEA in two ways.
First, the Post has endorsed a rather different group of candidates than have the teachers. Compare their picks:
At-Large
Post: Marc Elrich, Nancy Floreen, Hans Riemer, Duchy Trachtenberg
Apple: Marc Elrich, George Leventhal, Hans Riemer, Becky Wagner
District 1
Post and Apple: Roger Berliner
District 2
Post: Royce Hanson
Apple: Craig Rice
Half the time, the Post has picked opposite from the teachers. The Post’s choices are constrained by the relatively small number of viable candidates, but when they had a real option, they chose it.
Second, the Post’s endorsements are remarkably early. In the last two cycles, their council picks were announced on September 1 and September 4. It appears that they are making early picks this time to allow their supported candidates to spread word of their backing and to throw in a couple extra editorials to hammer their message home. Make no mistake: the Post’s editorial board is not a disinterested observer; they want to be a real player in our elections. They have an ideological agenda against the public employee unions rooted in their operation of private schools and their own union-bashing history. Their attack on George Leventhal for “leading the charge” on “coddling the unions” reflects this.
Past elections in MoCo have been characterized by battles between developers and civic activists. This time, we will see the Post duke it out with MCEA. It will be an election like no other.
Thursday, July 01, 2010
MCEA Finishes Endorsements
MCEA has issued its final endorsements in the Democratic primary. In addition to its previous recommended candidates, the union is supporting Aruna Miller for Delegate in District 15 and incumbent County Executive Ike Leggett.
Friday, June 04, 2010
The Apple Drops, Part Two
Here’s what the Apple means for the County Council races.
District 1 Endorsement: Incumbent Roger Berliner
This is a mild surprise as Berliner and MCEA have not been on each other’s Christmas card list. MCEA supported Republican incumbent Howie Denis over Berliner in 2006 and Berliner voted for “labor savings” in the 2008 budget debate.
But two factors operated in concert to bring the parties together. First, Berliner is not ideologically anti-union. He has never emphasized his opposition to the unions as have Council Members Phil Andrews and Duchy Trachtenberg. Second, there is a growing sense that Berliner is going to win his race against challenger Ilaya Hopkins. So MCEA faced a choice: make no endorsement, thereby ensuring continuous up-and-down relations with Berliner, or endorse him and hope that things will be better. The teachers are a pragmatic group so they chose the latter option. We will see if it pays off.
This is a serious blow to Hopkins. She was hoping for union support to help her uphill race, but now the most electorally influential union has thrown in with the incumbent. Berliner is on a roll now. He started out with a big chunk of cash in the bank. Then he rolled out a huge supporter list and a boatload of incumbent endorsements. Next came the revelation of Hopkins’s recent entry into the Democratic Party. Did we mention that Berliner is running his third race in the district while Hopkins is running for the first time? If the Washington Post endorses Berliner, this race is totally over.
District 2 Endorsement: Craig Rice
Incumbent Mike Knapp did not complete a questionnaire or report for an interview. Rice did both and did so as a council candidate. Dooley’s lopsided loss in 2006 affects perceptions of her as a candidate and Rice has done a good job as Delegate, so this endorsement was expected.
District 3 Endorsement: None
Incumbent Phil Andrews has been an opponent of the unions for many years, but he has no challenger. Even if he did, he would be certain to return to Rockville.
District 4 Endorsement: Incumbent Nancy Navarro
Former school board member: check. Past MCEA endorsee: check. No declared opponent: check. Woman of color: check. Apple Ballot: check.
District 5 Endorsement: Incumbent Valerie Ervin
Former school board member: check. Past MCEA endorsee: check. No declared opponent: check. Woman of color: check. Twenty-five years in the labor movement: check. Apple Ballot: check!
Additionally, we hear that Kensington Mayor Pete Fosselman will not be running against Ervin. An easy re-election will position Ervin for a County Executive run or maybe something even higher up.
At-Large Endorsements: Incumbents George Leventhal and Marc Elrich, challengers Becky Wagner and Hans Riemer
This is the most fateful set of endorsements on the Apple Ballot and will have a very large impact. Following is our assessment of the implications for each candidate.
George Leventhal: The two-term incumbent is now firmly in the driver’s seat. Leventhal will have all the money he needs, almost all the big endorsements (except possibly the Post’s) and will wage a solid campaign. We expect him to finish first in the at-large race for the second election in a row. If that happens, Leventhal will be a top contender to be the next County Executive.
Marc Elrich: Looks stronger every day. Elrich won last time with a dual base in the civic and labor communities. He has lost none of that support and is only adding to it. Elrich always has money problems due to his rejection of developer contributions, but he also has more ground troops than any other at-large candidate. We now believe that he will be going back to Rockville.
Becky Wagner and Hans Riemer: The conventional wisdom once was that only one of them would get the Apple, and that person would be in the best position to oust an incumbent. Now both have received the Apple. That means that each will be getting more endorsements, more money and more momentum. Could both of them win?
Duchy Trachtenberg: She was never going to be endorsed by MCEA or any other county employee union as she has done nothing but vote against them despite their invaluable aid to her in 2006. In fact, Trachtenberg told the unions to take a hike before they could tell that to her! The new wrinkle for Trachtenberg is that two challengers, not just one, now have the Apple and all the prestige it brings. Trachtenberg has tons of money and is certain to flood the county with tons of positive mail about herself, but she will have few endorsements and almost no ground troops. Is that enough for her to come back?
Nancy Floreen: Until this year, Floreen had been voting with the public employee unions almost every time this term. We still expect at least some of them to support her. (The police, fire fighters and SEIU backed her last time.) But what changed this year was that Floreen was the Council President, and she was responsible for the budget.
The overwhelming majority of our informants – and not just in labor – knocked Floreen’s handling of the budget. Most people close to the process say she did not do a good job in regularly touching base with the other Council Members, finding out what was acceptable to them, coordinating action with the schools and the Executive Branch and communicating effectively with the public. One influential official said, “Those who worked with Floreen on budget issues were confronted with nothing but platitudes and little willingness to actually engage on the specifics. As Chair of the Council, this was Floreen’s opportunity to provide leadership, yet leadership is the last descriptor that would come to anyone’s mind in this case.” Another high-ranking player described her as a “deer in the headlights” and advocating positions in negotiations that had not been vetted with the rest of the council. Floreen has her defenders and some of this criticism may be unfair. What other Council President has ever had to close a billion dollar deficit? But many Rockville players found Floreen’s performance to be disappointing and that helped edge her out of the Apple Ballot.
There is an element of Shakespearean tragedy here. Floreen wanted to be Council President so badly that she shoved aside former Vice-President Roger Berliner to get the job. If Floreen had been a back-bencher this year and was not saddled with the budget disaster, she may have squeaked through for an Apple. Now Berliner, of all people, has the Apple and Floreen has problems. Sometimes in life, you get what you want and it hurts you.
But Nancy Floreen is a female incumbent with money who has won twice before without the teachers. She is FAR from through.
Jane de Winter and Fred Evans: De Winter has been running since last summer and has not gained any traction. Evans just got in. No one sees either as likely to win.
That’s all for now, folks!
Thursday, June 03, 2010
The Apple Drops, Part One
The endorsement of the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), which is distributed by teachers on election day as the “Apple Ballot,” is a seminal event in any MoCo election cycle. In the last election, the Apple outperformed the newspaper endorsements and most politicians rate it as more important than support from the Post. Most Apple endorsees are reliable incumbents with good voting records who are almost certain to win. But in every cycle, there are surprises and the Apple can make a big difference. Here’s what caught our eye in this year’s endorsement round.
District 14 Endorsements: Senate challenger Karen Montgomery, Delegate Anne Kaiser, Delegate candidates Craig Zucker and Eric Luedtke
No surprises. Incumbent Senator Rona Kramer has a woeful labor record and Karen Montgomery should sweep the unions. Kaiser and Luedtke (a former MCEA board member) are no-brainers and Zucker is a heavy favorite to win. MCEA will take some criticism for not endorsing a black candidate, but few people think that former WSSC Commissioner Gerald Roper or home minister Vanessa Ali will run viable campaigns.
District 15 Endorsements: Senator Rob Garagiola, Delegates Brian Feldman and Kathleen Dumais
Again, no surprises. MCEA is leaving open a Delegate endorsement because incumbent Craig Rice may be running for County Council and the field to replace him has yet to materialize.
District 16 Endorsements: Senator Brian Frosh, Delegates Susan Lee and Bill Frick, Delegate candidate Ariana Kelly
Frosh, Lee and Frick were locks. We hear ten candidates came in to interview for the open seat vacated by former incumbent Bill Bronrott. Most were no-names. Kelly stood out because of her long record of advocacy on women’s issues. She is going to face a vigorous contest from Kyle Lierman, the son of former Democratic Party Chairman Terry Lierman. Young Dems President Scott Goldberg has an outside chance if he can put together a big campaign.
District 17 Endorsements: Senator Jennie Forehand, Delegates Kumar Barve, Luiz Simmons and Jim Gilchrist
The incumbent Delegates have no declared Democratic challengers. MCEA’s endorsement of Forehand is intended as a message for other incumbents: if you have a good voting record on our issues, we will not abandon you in your time of need. The teachers endorsed former District 20 Senator Ida Ruben for the same reason in 2006 despite the fact that challenger Jamie Raskin was running a much stronger campaign at the time. The Apple is helpful to Forehand, but by itself it cannot hold off Cheryl “Energizer Bunny” Kagan. Forehand has a lot of work to do.
District 18 Endorsements: Delegates Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher and Al Carr
Senator Rich Madaleno’s exclusion from the Apple Ballot sends a different kind of message to the other incumbents. Madaleno was the staff author of the Thornton Plan, a 2002 law that has spread hundreds of millions of dollars of state money to school districts across the state, including MCPS. He has been with MCEA on every issue since until this year, when he proposed a plan to send part of the state’s teacher pension obligations down to the counties. This was an unspeakable heresy for MCEA because MoCo could never bear the resulting colossal liability. So while Madaleno will definitely be re-elected, MCEA is warning the other incumbents not to stray on the issue. If they can withhold the Apple from their former best friend over pensions, they can withhold it from any other apostates too.
The incumbent Delegates have solid labor records and were natural endorsees. (Disclosure: the author is the incumbent team’s Treasurer.)
District 19 Endorsements: Senator Mike Lenett, Delegate Ben Kramer, Delegate candidates Bonnie Cullison and Jay Hutchins
The message on the Senate side is the same as in District 17: MCEA does not abandon helpful incumbents even if they face quality challengers. The difference is that Mike Lenett, unlike Jennie Forehand, is an aggressive campaigner who will take full advantage of the Apple. District 19 voters are going to be so buried under Apples with Lenett’s name on them that they will have to eat cherry pie for a year after the election.
The Delegate decision has lots of implications. Cullison is MCEA’s former President so she is an automatic endorsee. Kramer would win re-election with or without the Apple. But MCEA is telling him this: we will be with you if you want to go back to the House, but we will oppose you if you want to go to the County Council. We’ll find out in a month what Kramer wants to do. Hutchins is a big winner as the Apple gives him instant credibility. Sam “Hunk of the Hill” Arora has a lot more money and has been more active on the campaign trail than any of the other Delegate candidates. Hutchins needs to get into high gear to hold him off.
District 20 Endorsements: Senator Jamie Raskin, Delegates Sheila Hixson, Heather Mizeur, Tom Hucker
Total no-brainer. All four are great on labor and education and are destined to return.
District 39 Endorsements: Senator Nancy King, Delegates Charles Barkley and Kirill Reznik, Delegate candidate Arash Shane Robinson
King is a longtime MCEA ally who helped to hire MCPS Superintendent Jerry Weast when she was on the school board. The teachers were never going to throw her overboard for challenger Saqib Ali. Barkley is a former MCEA Vice-President and Reznik has done well since his 2007 appointment. Robinson is a complete unknown who just left the Green Party to become a Democrat, but the teachers preferred him to former Republican Bob Hydorn. Robinson is an ally of Saqib Ali and spoke at Ali’s Senate kickoff. Will Ali steer money to him? Hydorn is the President of the Montgomery Village Foundation and is a name in his part of the district. He needs to run an aggressive campaign in the rest of the district or Robinson could squeak in.
We’ll cover the County Council tomorrow.
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
And the Apple Goes to…
The Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) decided its endorsements tonight at its Representative Assembly. The winners of the Apple Ballot are…
District 14
Senate: Karen Montgomery (challenger)
House: Anne Kaiser, Eric Luedtke (open seat), Craig Zucker (open seat)
District 15
Senate: Rob Garagiola
House: Kathleen Dumais, Brian Feldman, no endorsement for vacated third seat
District 16
Senate: Brian Frosh
House: Bill Frick, Ariana Kelly (open seat), Susan Lee
District 17
Senate: Jennie Forehand
House: Kumar Barve, Jim Gilchrist, Luiz Simmons
District 18
Senate: No endorsement
House: Al Carr, Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher
District 19
Senate: Mike Lenett
House: Bonnie Cullison (open seat), Jay Hutchins (open seat), Ben Kramer
District 20
Senate: Jamie Raskin
House: Sheila Hixson, Tom Hucker, Heather Mizeur
District 39
Senate: Nancy King
House: Charles Barkley, Kirill Reznik, Shane Robinson (open seat)
County Council At-Large
Marc Elrich, George Leventhal, Hans Riemer (challenger), Becky Wagner (challenger)
Council District 1
Roger Berliner
Council District 2
Craig Rice
Council District 3
No endorsement
Council District 4
Nancy Navarro
Council District 5
Valerie Ervin
Board of Education
Shirley Brandman, Judy Docca, Mike Durso, Pat O’Neill
We’ll have more tomorrow morning, folks!
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Manno Supporters Lobby for Apple
Fifty-eight supporters of Delegate Roger Manno's campaign for Senate have written MCEA on his behalf arguing for his place on the Apple Ballot. That endorsement is rated by MoCo politicians as more valuable than support from the Washington Post. Among Manno's supporters are Delegates Hank Heller and Ana Sol Gutierrez, former Senator Len Teitelbaum, former Delegates Adrienne Mandel and Carol Petzold, former Delegate candidates Tom DeGonia, Guled Kassim and Arnold Gordon, former MCEA Board Member Jackie Lichter, Student Board of Education Member Tim Hwang and progressive leader Mike Hersh. We reprint their letter below.
Thursday, May 06, 2010
MCEA Delays Apple Ballot Recommendations (Updated)
Last night, MCEA's Representative Assembly was scheduled to vote on Apple Ballot recommendations for most state legislative races in the county. But the session was taken up mostly by contract-related issues and the union decided to postpone its endorsement decision until the next assembly meeting on June 2. At that time, we understand that MCEA will release all of its recommendations for state and county offices together. That would be a return to the procedure used by the union in 2006.
The assembly did vote to make one endorsement: District 19 House candidate Bonnie Cullison, who is the union's former President.
Update: MCEA sent the following email to candidates.
We would like to thank you so much for coming to interview with MCEA. Our goal last night was to make all our recommendations. Due to other agenda items that took more time than anticipated, we unfortunately did not have enough time to dedicate to the recommendation process. We want to ensure that our representatives are given the full opportunity to participate fully. Therefore, we voted yesterday to move almost all the MCEA Recommendations to our June meeting. We apologize for any inconvenience. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact our Legislative Director Jon Gerson at 301-294-6232.
--
Thanks,
Abby Hendrix
MCEA Political Action and Legislative Support Committee Chair
Monday, April 19, 2010
MCEA Starts its Recommendation Process
The Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) is starting its recommendation process for state and local candidates. At stake is the Apple Ballot, rated by most Montgomery County politicians as the county’s most valuable endorsement.
MCEA offered the following description of how its process worked in 2006. The process this year will be virtually identical.MCEA Candidate Recommendation Process
MCEA has circulated the following questionnaire to Senate and House candidates. The questions are prefaced by requests for basic identifying information, like the candidate’s name, address, contact info, district and campaign committee info.
MCEA conducts one of the most thorough candidate screening processes of any organization in the county.
MCEA contacts all incumbents and all announced and rumored candidates for office. We also run ads in both major party county newsletters soliciting candidates to participate in our screening process.
All candidates are asked to complete a detailed questionnaire. All candidates are invited to participate in a personal interview with a team of rank-and-file MCEA member-volunteers from the Political Action and Legislative Support (PALS) Committee. This year alone, the PALS Committee has conducted more than 90 candidate interviews. Each candidate is asked a set of structured questions. The interviews are all taped. The PALS Committee then discusses the interviews, reviews the questionnaires, and makes a recommendation to the MCEA Board. A 58% vote by the PALS Committee is necessary for a recommendation. The Board then reviews the recommendations, considers the broader political contexts, and makes its own recommendations; again with a 58% majority requirement. Those recommendations then go to MCEA’s final decision-making body, the Representative Assembly. At the RA, typically more than 130 elected MCEA Reps from schools all across the county discuss and debate the candidates. Approval of final recommendations of candidates again requires a 58% majority vote.
Criteria
MCEA bases its recommendations on a number of factors, including:
1. Voting Record
For County Council and County Executive, primary consideration is given to votes approving funding for our contracts and votes on tax issues to provide adequate funding for the public school system. For Board of Education, primary consideration is given to votes approving our contracts, as well as votes on other educational policy issues that affect the working conditions of MCEA unit members. For the General Assembly MSTA [the state teachers] compiles a voting record. For example, during the last legislative term, the MSTA scorecard includes 12 votes in the Senate and 15 in the House over the four year term. In some situations the listed votes were unanimous. In other situations there were multiple votes on the same bill. Listed votes included numerous tax issues related to ensuring adequate funding for education, as well as votes on use of public tax dollars for private schools, as well as high profile votes on the Thornton school funding plan, the pension enhancement, and the proposed state take-over of 11 public schools in Baltimore.
2. Written Responses to Questionnaire
For the General Assembly, MSTA distributes a questionnaire. Consideration is given both to the “yes/no” answers on support for MSTA’s positions as well as the extent and quality of the written comments elaborating on their positions. For the County Council, County Executive and Board of Education, the questionnaires are developed by MCEA. All questions require written explanations and they are evaluated based on the extent and quality of the written comments.
3. Interview Quality
The interview is an essential component of the screening process. Candidates are evaluated based on their understanding of the issues, their ability to communicate effectively, and their positions on the issues.
4. Communication with MCEA and its Members
It is important to MCEA that we not elect candidates who only think about us when they need our support for re-election. Elected officials who communicate regularly with MCEA’s elected leaders earn additional consideration. Those who only contact the organization when they want our support for re-election do not. We also want elected officials who are responsive to our members as well. Candidates who are accessible during the legislative session, who are willing to meet with delegations of members (when asked) on lobby visits, and the quality of those visits, are relevant as well.
5. Participation at MCEA events
MCEA annually sponsors a Legislative Breakfast to give our members the opportunity to meet informally with their elected representatives (county officials as well as members of the state delegation) and to provide an opportunity for those representatives to learn more about the organization’s priority. Those who participate earn our support.
6. Effectiveness as an Elected Official
It is important to MCEA that the representatives we support be effective in getting bills passed. It is not sufficient to be on the right side of issues if you are unable to build the coalitions and provide the leadership to actually make things happen. The record of elected officials in actually getting bills passed, in making things happen, is a consideration as well. Elected officials who move up to positions of leadership, be it in the General Assembly or in county government, can exert more influence and clearly have support from among their colleagues. While one cannot expect first-term politicians to assume leadership positions; over time whether an elected official moves into positions of leadership (ex. committee or subcommittee chairs) is another measure of their effectiveness.
7. Diversity/ Union Membership
MCEA makes no apologies for wanting to promote more diversity among the elected leadership of our increasingly diverse county. MCEA also believes that the election of active union members to office is good for our organization, the labor movement, and working families in general. As a result, we strive to support candidates of color and candidates who are active union members.
8. Campaign Viability
Being right on the issues isn’t enough. A candidate must be able to run a competitive campaign. Consideration is given to the quality of a candidate’s campaign plan, their ability to raise the money they will need, the extent of endorsements they have from prominent community leaders and organizations, early poll numbers (if available), and the nature of their opposition. For incumbents, their record of communication with their constituents and their visibility in their districts are also relevant indicators of their campaign’s viability. Incumbents who communicate regularly with their constituents and who regularly attend community events in their district are more likely to have a base of support among voters. Those who do not enter their re-election campaigns without the same viability.
9. Support from Allies
A candidate’s positions on education issues is primary to MCEA. However a candidate’s positions on other issues that MCEA, MSTA and NEA may have policy positions on, are also relevant (for example, raising the minimum wage, protecting collective bargaining rights, etc.). Consideration is given to candidates’ responses on questionnaires, and their support or lack of support, from the Central Labor Council and other similar organizations.
10. Past Support from MCEA
Whether or not a candidate has received MCEA’s recommendation in the past is a relevant factor as well.
11. Assistance to MCEA in other ways
MCEA on occasion asks incumbent elected officials, and aspiring candidates, to assist the organization in other ways. Frequently we seek support from others for our recommended candidates for the Board of Education. Recently we sought support on our successful pension campaign. Incumbents and candidates who are responsive and support the organization in other ways also earn additional consideration.1. While our members recognize the fiscal challenges faced by the state, they are concerned about the possibility of shifting pension costs to the counties and how that would have an impact on local funding for schools systems. How would you ensure that solutions developed to deal with spending priorities, including pensions, do not hurt students and education employees?
MCEA is interviewing Senate and Delegate candidates in most districts this week. Its Representative Assembly will vote on the endorsements on May 5 and the announcement will follow immediately. MCEA will interview state legislative candidates in Districts 14 and 16, as well as all county-level candidates, in May and announce its endorsements in those races on June 2.
The following are MSEA [state teachers] position statements on critical issues in the MSEA Legislative Program. For each issue, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the MSEA position. Be certain each comment clearly indicates your position. There is space provided for you to elaborate on your positions.
Agree with the MSEA position statement – Would support legislation that reflects the MSEA position.
Disagree with the MSEA position statement – Would oppose legislation that reflects the MSEA position.
2. The existing Maintenance of Effort law dealing with a minimum level of local funding for public education is intended to reinforce the shared responsibility between the state and counties for adequate funding of our public schools. MSEA is opposed to efforts to reduce or weaken the minimum funding requirement. Do you agree or disagree with MSEA’s position?
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
3. The Thornton Commission recommended an adjustment in State Education aid to reflect regional differences in the cost of providing educational services, called the Geographic Cost of Education Index (GCEI). MSEA believes GCEI is an integral part of full funding for the Thornton plan and should be included in the State’s school finance system.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
4. Public schools accept and educate all students who enter them. Diversion of public funds from public schools jeopardizes this mission. Therefore, MSEA opposes draining funds from public schools through private or religious school vouchers, direct state funds for programs, textbooks, technology, direct state aid to non-public schools at risk of closing, or tax credits for private school tuition.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
5. As we look ahead to the next four years, we realize that budget and revenue changes are inevitable. To raise additional revenues, MSEA supports full utilization of existing revenue producers (homestead tax credit and local income tax), spreading the base (combined reporting for corporations and sales tax on services), and reform of the state’s income tax brackets. Would you consider these options and do you have suggestions for additional revenue producers?
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
6. MSEA opposes contracting out, to the private sector, management and/or delivery of goods and services traditionally provided by public school employees.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
7. MSEA opposes public funding of religious and private for-profit charter schools and kindergarten programs. MSEA does not oppose public charter schools that meet the following criteria.
• Are under the control of local school boards
• All students are eligible
• Are held to the same standards as other public schools
• Staff members have the same collective bargaining rights as their counterparts in mainstream public schools and
• Must be qualitatively different from what is available in mainstream public schools and not just an avenue for parental choice.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
8. MSEA supports increased funding and resources at the national, state and local level for meaningful professional development for school personnel.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
9. MSEA supports a comprehensive system of assessment and accountability that relies on multiple measures of student achievement and prohibits the use of a sole test for high-stakes decisions. High-stakes decisions about students and schools should not be made on the basis of one test.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
10. MSEA supports a single salary schedule to insure that all educators are fairly compensated. Any system that provides additional compensation beyond the single salary schedule should meet the following criteria:
a) The design of the system must be collectively bargained.
b) Additional compensation must not be based solely on student test scores.
c) The criteria to determine eligibility for additional compensation must be clearly stated and subject to objective measurement.
d) The system should not directly or indirectly limit the number of education employees who are eligible for the additional compensation. All education employees should have the opportunity to meet the standards and receive the extra pay. The system may recognize and reward additional knowledge and skills the employees have acquired over the course of their careers.
e) Full funding should be available to sustain the system.
f) The system should not diminish the professional status of those education employees who do not receive the additional compensation.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
11. School buildings are the place of learning for 843,861 children and are the workplace for over 80,000 employees. The state Interagency Committee on School Construction currently has a $900 backlog of requests for school construction projects. MSEA supports continued state funding of at least $250 million annually for school construction.
________Agree with MSEA position
________Disagree with MSEA position
Comment:
Leadership positions in civic and community organizations:
Please share with us what you consider to be your most significant achievements:
List your top three priorities for Maryland:
Please return the completed questionnaire by Sunday, April 18, 2010 at midnight. to MCEA, 12 Taft Court; Rockville, Md. 20850, (attention Jon A. Gerson) or via fax at 301-309-9563 or email your response to jgerson@mcea.nea.org
MCEA is as open as any group in the county about how its endorsement process works. In fact, your author attended a meeting of the Montgomery County Civic Federation back in 2006 at which then-MCEA President Bonnie Cullison and union strategist Jon Gerson explained their decision-making and distributed questionnaires. If the Washington Post decided to supply similar details about its endorsement process, we would be happy to run them on this blog.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Post vs. Apple: Endorsement Record by the Numbers
Yesterday, nearly half of the elected state and county officials in Montgomery County debated the relative endorsement value of the Post and the Apple Ballot. Today, we’ll look at the recent comparative record of those endorsements as well as others.
Below, we show the results of all state legislative and county races in MoCo since 2006 as well as the endorsements of the Washington Post, the Gazette, the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), Progressive Maryland and the Sierra Club. All races are primaries unless otherwise indicated.
All five organizations had winning records overall. But the big differences came in races in which they chose to endorse non-incumbents. The two newspapers trailed the three other endorsers, with the Gazette having almost as many losers (ten) as winners (twelve). So much for the claim in a recent Gazette article that it is a “rarity” for anyone to win without the backing of the Gazette.
Now we should not make too much out of these records. Progressive Maryland and the Sierra Club sat out a lot of races, including all of the school board contests. Progressive Maryland's requirement that two-thirds of its Board of Directors agree to its picks probably kept it out of several close races. And out of these five organizations, few would disagree that the Teachers give the most tangible aid to their favored candidates. After all, the Washington Post does not dispatch hundreds of its employees to hand out “Post Ballots” on election day.
It gets more interesting when the Apple is compared to the newspapers on endorsements on which they disagree. Here is the Apple’s record against the Post since 2006:
And here is the Apple’s record against the Gazette since 2006:
Reasonable observers can disagree on the relative merit of each endorsement. But the majority of MoCo politicians have picked the Apple over the Post and we agree. Our hunch is that even given the Post’s bloody and misinformed campaign against MCEA, Montgomery voters still have more respect for teachers than for the anonymous mandarins of the Post.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Politicians Debate Endorsement Value of Post vs. Apple Ballot
The Washington area’s paper of record has launched an all-out holy war against the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), the county’s most powerful labor union. From a political perspective, this is important because both of their endorsements are considered among the most desirable in the county. If the Post is determined to annihilate MCEA, their endorsements may be headed in different directions. And so we asked a group of elected officials this question:
If you had a choice between getting endorsed by the Post OR getting on the Apple Ballot, but not both, which of the two would you pick and why?
Here is what they said.
Elected Official:
Apple for two reasons:
1. I’ve been elected before with endorsement from the teachers and not the Post.
2. People coming to the polls usually only take the Apple Ballot in with them when they go in to vote - they count on it.
Elected Official:
WashPost. Here’s why:
* I believe the Apple is respected by voters and especially teachers. However, I believe the WashPost is even more well known and even more widely respected. Walk up to an average person on the street, ask them what the Apple Ballot and the Washington Post is. They will likely know the latter but not the former. The Washington Post is a revered and historic institution (see: Woodward/Bernstein).
* The Apple Ballot has a good record of winning in 2006 MoCo races. However, they often endorse candidates who are more likely to win anyway. So their record has to be taken with a grain of salt. The MCEA will endorse people based on politics of who they owe favors and whom they need to work with after the election. I believe the WashPost is more principled since they don’t need to worry about contracts or worry about retribution from politicians who were jilted.
* Last time after I was endorsed by the MCEA, I was asked to pay $6,000. Would be great to save that money.
* There is a possibility that the War that the WashPost is waging on MCEA will reduce the effectiveness of the Apple Ballot. But the MCEA is unable to diminish the Post’s effectiveness. I think it might be difficult for the MCEA to solicit its endorsed candidates for $$$ since the WashPost has raised such a stink about it.... So if they have less money to publicize the Apple, they will be less effective.
Elected Official:
I would prefer the Apple Ballot - more people are influenced by it.
Elected Official:
If the election were held today… Apple Ballot by a nose. In a local race where schools and education rate near the top of what voters deem most important, the teachers’ endorsement is instant credibility. For someone running at the federal level, the Post probably noses out Apple Ballot in terms of influence over voters.
Elected Official:
The Post because with my record on education there is no way I could lose the real support of teachers who vote in my district. Besides, an editorial opinion by the newspaper of record is like pure gold.
Elected Official:
Tough call. When push comes to shove, I’d take the Post endorsement if I had the ground forces to pass out reprints of it. If not, I’d take the teachers because those guys have serious coverage on the ground.
Elected Official:
Toss up. The Post endorsement would normally trump in my opinion but because the paper waits until the Sunday before election day to typically make its selections, it’s not as useful to candidates as it otherwise would be if they endorsed a few weeks earlier. We have to run through hoops in 24 hours to try to print materials that say “Endorsed by the Washington Post” and it is costly. The Apple Ballot endorsements are done early enough in the year to include their logo on our yard signs and other materials. Not to mention how helpful it is to have MCEA/teacher volunteers passing the ballot out at each polling place.
As far as the voter is concerned, I think they appreciate the viewpoint of both sources. Perhaps for BOE and County Council candidates, who have more control and impact on the education process in the county, the Apple Ballot carries extra weight. With state legislators, we handle so many more issues than education, that the WaPo endorsement is more a statement of the entire candidacy and on a range of issues.
Elected Official:
I believe that the credibility of the Post is weak. Older people seem to take the Post seriously, but the younger voters and more diverse communities do not. Social networking tools, blogs and radio play a stronger role. Teachers are very well regarded, and the school system has worked hard in creating a collaborative environment based on student achievement outcomes.
Elected Official:
The Post. At the end of the day, the Apple Ballot is a tool of a special interest group, albeit one I support. The reality is that they are only concerned about their teachers. Meanwhile the Post, I hope, would base their endorsement on a variety of factors.
Elected Official:
Apple Ballot, every time.
Dem voters use the Apple Ballot to cut through the clutter and confusion of down-ballot candidates and issues. They don’t know who we are, but they know they like teachers and education. If we’re good enough for the teachers, we’re good enough for them.
Elected Official:
Apple Ballot, hands down. The Post is well and good, but the Post is not going to be doing mailings, buying TV time, and deploying an army of teachers on a day off from school standing at the polls handing out literature with my name on it.
Elected Official:
Apple.
In our system where state and county officials are on a crowded gubernatorial ballot every four years in a closed primary with low turnout and low name recognition of candidates, and no threat of a challenge in the general election, the Apple Ballot carries much more weight than the Post.
Elected Official:
Easy. Apple Ballot. Has nothing to do with clout. Everything to do with my values. I don’t give a ______ about what a newspaper thinks.
Elected Official:
Apple Ballot. People are still more likely to grab an Apple Ballot when they walk into a polling station on Election Day and early voting days. There may be less luster with the Apple Ballot due to recent Post editorials, but there are less and less Post readers these days so negative media will not have much impact on views towards the Apple Ballot. Perhaps if the negative media occurred a few years ago, then it might have had a greater impact on the Apple Ballot. I think less people care who the Post endorses with each passing election. It is still a worthy endorsement - to get the Post endorsement - but I think its impact is diminishing and will continue to do so.
Elected Official:
The Post presumably looks at a Council Member’s total record; MCEA has a narrower focus. Therefore, a Post endorsement is more substantial. As to which has more impact, that is a close call, and may be different for each individual District Council Member, depending on their district, than At-Large Members.
Elected Official:
If the unions behave “badly,” make a fight out of pay issues which will likely be off the table because of how bad things are, then they are going to offend many voters. More so, because in the primary these are the voters who pay most attention. I have yet to talk to anyone who says raise taxes, protect union raises, I’m happy to pay for it. Unions could poison the water by pushing too hard and tarnish the value of their endorsements. On the other hand, if they’re proactively part of the solution, they could get big credit for helping the county get over the hump. Or they could hand the Post an issue that they’ll beat elected officials to death with.
The Apple is worth more than any other union endorsement, but not if we get in a major fight over the budget. If that’s avoided, and the Post is deprived of this issue, then Apple trumps Post. I think the Post editorials have been damaging, judging by the comments I’m seeing, but it’s February and will be hard to keep alive. But a budget fight changes everything. Look at it this way, the data shows income loss in virtually every income bracket. COLAs and steps against a background of declining incomes for very many county residents will be a story that keeps on giving for the Post. The truth is that the Post and the Unions have largely endorsed the same candidates, so a scenario that was either/or would not be a good scenario.
Elected Official:
If you had asked me a couple of years ago, I would have said the Post. Interestingly, given the number of negative editorials the Post has written about the Council and various issues over those past two years, I would have anticipated that there would have been a real increase in negative reaction associated with those articles because that tended to be the case previously when the Post wrote similar pieces. I have been surprised that there has been very little response on the part of County residents which would lead me to believe that either people aren’t reading the editorials, or don’t care what is being written. Either way it shows a pretty significant decline in influence. I am not sure that I consider the Apple Ballot the holy grail, but if you have a crowded field in an at-large race or even a district primary I think it would be much more helpful to have the Apple Ballot, because at the end of the day it is also feet on the ground at polling places and is a good brand being handed out to voters by teachers which also puts a good face on the candidate they endorse.
Elected Official:
The Post, although both endorsements in general matter less than they used to. The Post has fewer readers, so the time that candidates have time to publicize the endorsement, along with the number of voters who vote early (possibly before the Post endorses), makes a potentially big difference, and the general reputation of pubic employee unions has declined.
This year I think the Post will matter more than the Apple Ballot, because I don’t think it will be much if any advantage to candidates this year to have union endorsements because of the unwillingness of union leaders to fully and publicly recognize the severity of the budget problem and agree that ANY pay raises are out of the question. In fact, furloughs are all but certain. The more that unions argue or hold out for any pay raises, the more they hurt themselves with the general public. If union leadership continues to hold out, it could be that union endorsements will hurt a candidate this year, even in a Democratic primary. Since teachers are not generally viewed by the public as a typical union, and since the teachers union is the largest, the teachers endorsement will continue to be the most important union endorsement. In addition, if the Post runs numerous editorials, as they have, that describe union influence as outsized and connect it to unaffordable pay increases and tax increases, that increases the influence of the Post's endorsements.
One other difference: as a humorist once noted, not many organizations buy ink by the barrel, as does the Post.
Elected Official:
I’d pick the Post as long as they did it far enough in advance to get the word out. Sometimes, they endorse so close to Election Day that it doesn’t matter much.
Elected Official:
The Apple Ballot, of course. The Post did not endorse me in my last election; MCEA’s Apple has endorsed me every time - and I got ELECTED!! Enough said.
Elected Official:
Off the record, MCEA has data showing a stronger response to the Apple Ballot endorsement than to the Post endorsement. Off the record as well, at this point as a voter I wouldn’t trust either one. The Post doesn’t know what it is doing most of the time in local elections and can be easily bamboozled by a few well-placed phone calls from certain people. In large election years, it endorses people for local office that the editors have never even met. If your name is on the Apple Ballot, the voter just has to guess about why exactly you are there - it may be mostly because of your positions, it may be mostly because of your race or gender or sexual preference (being the right identity at the right time), it may be because the union leadership wants to send someone a message. One thing is for sure - it is not primarily about the candidate’s commitment to what the kids need, unless you believe that what is good for MCEA is good for the kids’ education (just like what is good for GM is good for America). Of course, the union leadership really believes with unquestioning faith that this statement is true.
Elected Official:
Easy: I would pick the Apple because it is closer to my values (support for teachers, support for working people, belief in education) than the Post (arrogant union-busters). Even if I lose the election, I would rather stand with teachers than with the cynical elitists who comprise the Post’s editorial board.
However, the real question is: who would you rather punch in the nose: Lee Hockstader or Jon Gerson? The answer to that one is not so easy. Both are little tyrants who believe they are entitled to exert disproportionate control over county politics.
###
The above sample constitutes about half of all MoCo elected officials at the county and state levels. While most of them respect both endorsements, twelve expressed a preference for the Apple Ballot, six expressed a preference for the Post and four did not have a clear choice. Let’s bear in mind that these opinions were given in the immediate aftermath of three Post attacks on MCEA in three weeks. We will bring some data to this debate tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
