Press "Enter" to skip to content

Election Recap: Progress in Principles, Not Material Things

Both Madison and Sioux Falls voted to spend big tax dollars on sports arenas last night. The victors in big government sports spending are bubbling with language of progress and moving forward. In Madison, at least, I find it difficult to view succumbing to the extortion of administrators and voters who won't put education and safety above their lust for a bigger gym as a sign of progress.

So as the Madison Central School District puts my tax dollars to work building someone else's sports fantasies (and let's watch now to see whose names are engraved on our new temple to the jockocracy), I turn elsewhere in the country to find signs of progress. And indeed, Election Night brings more hopeful signs of real cultural progress:

So while sports fans in Madison and Sioux Falls celebrate their taxpayer-funded ability to sit together in bigger crowds, voters of all stripes around the country can celebrate the democratic defense of much more important liberties in Mississippi, Ohio, and Maine.

Update 06:38 MST: Oh yeah, and Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce, the guy who wrote Arizona's really bad anti-immigration law, lost his recall election last night. Rejecting xenophobic scapegoating for seeking common ground: now that's progress!

Update 06:44 MST: Penn State reminds us what enabling the jockocracy gets you.

Update 07:18 MST: Dr. Blanchard points out that Mississippians did pass strong limits on eminent domain for private development. Hooray for property rights!

21 Comments

  1. Matt Groce 2011.11.09

    Extortion? Really? I think you just jumped the shark.

  2. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.11.09

    I jumped the shark years ago. Still kicking.

    Review Robert Cordts's comment. He says the poltiical reality is that we couldn't pass a renovation plan without also building a new gym. That fits the "hostage-taking" idea that I posted earlier.

  3. Cory.. he is right about that gym being an integral piece of the total package. We could not pass the vote when it was just a gym either. They go together. You can't just have a gym and you can't just have a school without a gym either. People wanted a plan to take care of the entire school, including the gym. A SUPER Majority agreed with the School Board and the Vote Yes Campaign this time. A MAJORITY voted yes in every ward. Now this crazy idea that we need super majorities to pass some things in this country makes it very hard, but this time a super majority did vote YES and we will get a new and remodeled school... gym and all.

    I do agree with many that some of the votes were note based on the school plan at all, but just the financing portion. Many people who voted no last time where not against the gym, or school plan, but against the financing.

    I have been very loud in my belief that the hardcore no votes will always vote no against new taxes, no matter what. We have some Grover Norquist followers out there that believe in no taxation.

    But my idea that I shouted loudly back in February was that we needed to keep the same plan or slightly modify it and go back to the public and increase our voter turnout and turn some people to the YES side. I argued that we should not try to please all no voters, as some will never consider voting yes. Last night, that was 35% of the votes. So instead of trying to win over everyone, we went after the extra 10% we needed. We increased voter turnout; we increased the yes votes by over 15%. We even had a simple majority of voters in Ward 3 and the Rural ward. A super majority approved the plan and at the end of the day, our children will get a modernized facility.

    There was no extortion. We presented a case and campaign that brought the needed votes to our side.

    I thank all of you that voted Yes! Unlike Charlie, I do not care to thank the no voters. I applaud you for voting and exercising your democratic rights... but I do not applaud your no votes. ;) I will celebrate with the YES voters today!

  4. Matt Groce 2011.11.09

    It doesn't fit hostage-taking. It fits political reality. And whether Bob is right with his numbers or not, his point well taken. For evidence go back to the Middle School votes of the 1990's. Now being about 10 years old at the time I don't remember this, but I understand that there was a very close vote at some point. After a narrow defeat it was decided to save money by making gym reductions. The next vote received fewer yes votes.

    I do think there is a segment of the population that would not have voted for a project without a gym. Just as there are those that wont for anything if it has a gym.
    Just as last night somebody voted no in Sioux Falls because the event center wasn't downtown, and somebody said "lets get sausage because I don't like pepperoni!"

    It is the nature of politics. It's a give and take. I am encouraged that a group of people came together, and came to a compromise. Don't forget that last March I stood at a microphone and said in no uncertain terms that the district should not invest capitol outlay money in this project. I still believe that to an extent, but I had to decide what was the best way to accomplish the goals I deemed most important.

    If you want to continue to debate the merits of the compromise, that's fine, go ahead. It's right that those who wish to continue to debate that are allowed to do so.

    But when you throw out words like extortion, and hostage-taking. When you imply illegality and corruption, when you toss around hyperbole as gospel, when you behave like the boy who cried wolf, you loose credibility. When you accuse, again and again, individuals of committing crimes, while having no basis in fact to do so, you loose credibility. And we as a community slowly loose the ability to have these conversations in a rational and productive manner.

    If I was judging a debate round and a student made a claim as irresponsible as you extortion claim, I would call them on it. And so I will call you on it. Let's stop it with the criminal accusations and the name calling, it doesn't help anyone.

  5. Charlie Johnson 2011.11.09

    Ashley, "Conduct in victory requires humility. It is both earned and expected." I will along with many others will congratulate all the voters who were willing take part in the process yesterday. The no voters carry about education also. Please don't be so "chump". How we carry on from here on out is so important.

  6. Like I said.. I applaud those that voted. I however, can celebrate that my cause won the day... much like others have done in the past with every election we have ever had in this country. As a voter, I have felt the sting of defeat, and other times, the bliss of success.

    I didn't say anyone didn't care about education... what I said is people care about taxes. At no point in this current campaign did I ever say that someone who votes no does not care about education. I have said that no voters typically will continue to vote no, mostly because it was about taxes. That is a political reality. I know there are some, like Cory, that support education but did not believe in the plan. Others I know, simple did not want their property taxes to go up. We all vote for personal reasons and at the end of the day, it is mostly a compromise. We rarely get everything we want from one candidate, from one ballot measure, etc. etc.

    A little ribbing, joking, and celebration should be expected, especially with wild claims of extortion from the other side and claims that some were trying to build a "luxury" gym. Some of the attacks on the leaders of our school have also been grandiose and over the top in nature. This is unfortunately the nature of campaigning and punditry.

    By the way Charlie.. I am saving you a spot in my luxury sauna that will be built in my luxury gym, in my private box with flashing lights that pulse to the crowd's applause. I hope you will join me. :)

    Let's not take everything so seriously. Really...

    I am humbled by all that have worked on this plan for years and years and I am proud that the Madison electorate made such a fine decision for the future our community. I was pleased that we could work with people that had a wide array of opinions in the community and come up with a compromise that was acceptable to a super majority of voters. I know the School Board, Vince, Sharon, Bud, and the entire staff will work hard to be good stewards of the public's money during the construction of our new school.

  7. Douglas Wiken 2011.11.09

    $6,000,000 would make 150 $40,000 college loans/scholarships or purchase about 80,000
    library or reference books at $75.

    There are always better ways to use taxpayer money than building unnecessary, counterproductive gymnasiums..

  8. Jim 2011.11.09

    Cory, I am sure you know that it was not me that posted above.

    [CAH: You're right, Jim, and that's why I deleted the missing-the-point comment to which you refer... even though I did appreciate the assonance of "jockocracy" and "jackassery".]

  9. John Hess 2011.11.09

    It's passed so hoot and holler, but save some enthusiasm for other things, like downtown development. Let our civic leaders know what else we need, cause not everyone agrees about the next step.

  10. Rob Honomcihl 2011.11.09

    I agree with John....we need the businesses to be able to grow as well to support the events and people that visit. Delon your DQ may have to get bigger.

  11. Charlie Johnson 2011.11.09

    When naming rights come about, let's be careful not to "Sanfordized" the process. It would be important to recognize past educators/students who made a great contribution to the history of the school. Names like Dan Barker, John Collingnon, Francis Murphy, Annetee Groenveld, Ken Reitzel, Bill Ireland, and the list go on. When it is actually the real estate owners who will finance and pay for the school, it would be somewhat insulting to have a company/individual with the deepest pocket to put their name plate on the school. Fundraising should go to lower the cost/tax burden of the project, replensh the capital outlay fund, lower the tax burden,etc. There maybe some late minute changes to accomodate for but if major fundraising just balloons the scope of the project beyond 14.5 million estimate, that would be a public relations nightmare. There is obvious support for the project. It now needs to go beyond verbal and election support. Financial support of all sizes from a wide range of individuals is needed. Capital outlay fund will be stretched now and into the future. Giving should not be about boasting. It should be about doing the right thing.

  12. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.11.09

    I'm with you there, John! I'm ready to back (almost) whatever big downtown project Ashley turns his attention to now!

  13. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.11.09

    ...and Rob, I'll certainly be happy to blog the economic data that accompanies our new event center's opening and first few years of operation. But I'm worried: Sharon Knowlton said her staff was "overwhelmed" managing the Mundt debate tournament; will they find the energy to manage even bigger events in an even bigger facility?

  14. Charlie Johnson 2011.11.10

    Anyone care to answer or comment. Will there be the energy and work necessary by local supporters of education to advance changes in school funding by legislature and the governor? Is our school board and teaching staff ready to handle an additional short fall in funding in 2012? Do we know which staff members or programs that may further need to be eliminated? Will we have staff to fill all the classrooms when MHS "reopens" in 2014? Is campaigning for "brick and mortar" more sexy that tackling the real issues of how we adequately fund education? Do we have local educators, staff, political leaders who will challenge and stand up to the powerful special interests who continue to uphold the status quo in education "non" funding. My comment: That dog fight will require much more than has been experienced already in a renovation campaign.

  15. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.11.10

    Charlie, the questions you pose will answer the interesting political question Robert Cordts raised. If Robert is right, if our community would not have voted for the HS renovation if the plan had not been designed to ensure a new gym, then no, they will not rise to challenge you give, not unless the Legislature threatens funding for basketball.

    But Charlie, if you are right, if 80% of the voters really do put education first, then they will lobby the Legislature hard to undo Daugaard's "new norm" and boost K-12 funding. They will vote Russell Olson out of office (and replace him with Ashley Allen!). They will push for one of those classrooms to be filled with a new debate team. They will push for another of those classrooms to be filled with a fourth full-time HS English teacher.

  16. Heather Lee 2011.11.10

    Cory, it sounds as though you feel those who voted for the bond issue only voted YES because of the gym. Many of us do not care about the gym just need to get this going to be sure our childern have a safe and up to date school that will help ensure their education. I walked through the hallways the other day before the vote and the make shift changes to accomadate the needs of the technology alone was a mess. The school just looked old. Just my thoughts.

  17. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.11.10

    Actually, Heather, that's the thesis that Robert Cordts is advancing. He says no renovation plan would have passed without a new gym.

  18. I'm more of a Chief of Staff "Leo Thomas McGarry" type of guy... not a put my own name on the ballot kind of guy. I like to be the voice that influences the figurehead. Plus, I would have to change my political party to get elected in this state. People vote on two things at the state level, taxes and abortion. In both cases they say no to both. Not sure I want that fight.

    Charlie, I am with you. Battling for education funding is one thing that I can get behind. I don't think this new penny sales tax will be enough to bring education back to where it is going to need to be. I also like your BEEF program idea, but I think that is also a supplement. I am afraid if we get either of these passed, the SD Legislature will just take the money out of something else and keep current funding at the same levels.

    The current administration and legislature will not raise taxes or use our surpluses to support education and that is a real shame.

  19. Matt Groce 2011.11.10

    Don't forget Ashley, Leo ran for vice-president. Although that did kill him...

  20. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.11.10

    Ashley, for your chief of staff tack to work, you need to find a pol in power to influence. I believe in skipping the middle man. You've got candidate moxy.

    Plus, you're talking about influencing local and state issues. Short of governor, there really is no significant role for a McGarry, is there? Even if there is, most of the guys holding the positions we need to influence (city commission, Legislature) aren't going to listen to your influence or mine. Even if you could tell me that you have a guy in mind run for some position who would do your bidding, I'd say it's not enough to get one good guy in and whisper sweet policy nothings in his ear. I'd say we need both of you to run and fight on the front line!

    You're right: the current administration and Legislature won't get the job done. We need to replace them. We don't need McGarrys. We need Bartlets and Santoses.

  21. The VP is still the man behind the man...

    Exactly Matt... Exactly. I would have to up my life insurance first. Can you spend SuperPAC money on life insurance? ;)

Comments are closed.