"Barack Obama is an articulate, charismatic, fresh face, who symbolizes hope for those who have felt politically disenfranchised. But he has virtually no experience. Remember Jimmy Carter. Voting solely on the basis of race or gender is foolish. But blindly believing campaign promises, without exploring the realities, is even worse." - Richard Woldow, The Silent Majority, February 8, 2008.
January, 2009: President Barack Obama, and everything he stood for, is inaugurated amidst an almost-euphoric feeling - at least among Democrats and many Independents - that better times are at hand, economically, socially, and politically. The Bush Republicans had generously cooperated by managing to alienate about two-thirds of the American public, allowing Change We Can Count On to become more than just a slogan.
January, 2010. Unfortunately, for the Democrats and the nation, Change We Can Count On is still just the slogan of an inexperienced president. (Remember Jimmy Carter?) Obama was unable to follow up on his tidal wave of trust, unable to deal with the complexities of Wall Street bailouts, the economy, unemployment, skyrocketing national debt, home foreclosures, and, above all, his signature program, universal health care. Rather than taking charge, and utilizing the cache virtually handed to him by the electorate, he chose to hang back (Remember Jimmy Carter?), and allow lawmakers to craft expensive, controversial, rushed health care legislation. His approval rating fell more sharply than any first term president, and is still on the decline at under 50 percent.
The result was Scott Brown.
The Democrats fumbled away a Senate seat that had been theirs for five decades, and one in which their candidate, Martha Coakley, enjoyed a 30-point lead during the campaign. But it is not entirely a victory for the GOP. Brown ran on their ticket, but he never really positioned himself as a Republican. He constantly referred to Ted Kennedy's vacant seat as "The People's Seat", and won the hearts and minds of many disaffected Dems, and Indys, who had carried traditionally liberal Massachusetts for Obama just a year ago.
Scott Brown is an angry message to both parties. Fail to live up to your promises, and you will lose your constituents, and your offices. The victories of the seemingly polar opposites, Obama and Brown, just one year apart, demonstrates that voters have learned that we are empowered, and that we will hold our elected representatives accountable. Bush policies fail us, we go 180 degrees the other way. Obama policies fail us, we make a statement that seemed lunacy only a few months ago - a non-D representing Massachusetts.
There was never any question as to the vital importance of the Kennedy seat. While the Dems still have a sizeable majority in the Senate, they no longer have the presumed 60 votes to stave off a Republican filibuster. And Brown's populist opposition to the current fast-track, big-bucks, health care proposals has seemingly sounded the death knell for the bills as they now stand. Even Democrats are stepping back and re-evaluating their positions.
The Brown upset victory has left the White House, and the Mass GOP, blaming each other. As if the result was really a surprise. Nationally, Obama's approval ratings have been tumbling. Dems just lost key races in New Jersey and Virginia. Tea parties have reflected voter anger for months. Perhaps political observers should have paid more attention to our area, where the trend was even clearer. Despite a newly-enjoyed registration majority, Blues stayed home in droves last November, allowing Republicans to sweep every contested election in Upper Bucks, and almost every race in an entire county that had elected Obama with 54 percent only a year prior.
Just five days before voters spoke in Massachusetts, Upper Bucks' 30-year veteran State Rep, Paul Clymer, announced that he would retire at the end of this year. At age 72, Clymer had been considering stepping down for some time, but state Republicans needed his vote, and he answered his party's call. Clymer is somewhat of an oddity in politics today - a man who seemingly holds minority views on many social issues, yet is always elected in a landslide, regardless of opposition, either R or D. Perhaps it is because he is 1000 percent devoted to his work, and his constituents. If you have a need, he attends to it personally. For three decades he has been the consummate Dutch Uncle, and a man totally respected by his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
So it came as a shock to political observers, and local officials of both parties, when, less than two weeks later, Clymer was back in the race. Once again, the party beckoned. Harrisburg Reds felt that they would have to spend well into six figures to promote a new candidate, and that the money was better used in state races where the outcome was more in question. For far less, they can have their guaranteed win here. And, apparently, they didn't mind putting a moral, honest man in an embarrassing situation - or worry that their actions would affect his chances. Frankly, their vision seems shortsighted...
Democrats are at their weakest, and whoever is on the donkey's 145 th District ballot will be a sacrificial lamb, just like Anne Scheuring in last year's special election in the 24 th State Senate race. Their resources are being directed at holding onto whatever they have. Even without Clymer's presence, the state and county Dems would only give lip service to their party's candidate, providing minimal funding and support, to conserve resources until they have a fighting chance of winning. Like, maybe, 2012, if Obama can turn things around.
Tom Peterson, who lost badly to Clymer in 2008, has shown no interest in an encore. Also sitting this one out is former Qtown councilman David Zaiser, who lost his re-election bid in the Republican sweep in November. Four-time loser Brian Kline, who had to withdraw from the 2007 Richland Supervisor race after his slurs of Christian school families were made public, has told Dems that he is in. Mary Whitesell, the treasurer of the 145 th Dems, with a background in corporate work and community outreach, is also interested. An intriguing name is former QCSD director Julie Fagan, a professor at Rutgers, who became a Dem in 2008 to back Obama, and stayed. At the Dem's initial meeting to hear from candidates, Kline immediately attacked her, so she must be worthwhile. But with a Clymer redux, the Blue field will no doubt be narrowed.
Before Clymer announced his return, there was no shortage of Republican hopefuls. No, not the guys named in the always-unreliable anonymous blogs, Richland Supervisor Rick Orloff, or QCSD Director Paul Stepanoff. The leading candidate was Richland attorney Nate Fox, a personable political up-and-comer, who had quietly gathered widespread support from influential committee people and officials in at least half-a-dozen municipalities. There was a second Richland hopeful, conservative blogger Doreen Linder. Trumbauersville Council President Ed Child had hinted at succeeding Clymer for several years. Former East Rockhill Council President David Nyman was rejected by his own Republican party in 2009, and then ran for re-election unsuccessfully as a Dem. Former Republican strategist Mike Walsh has been at odds with some local elephants, and has garnered little support.
Anything in politics is subject to change. Just ask Martha Coakley. Or Barack Obama. But for at least the next two years, Paul Clymer will be our State Rep again. No Scott Browns here.