Good for what ails ya’!

Are all politics local?

If you are tired of the spinning and empty promises of our national leaders, have I got a cure for you. Anyone turned off by the state of politics today ought to attend a local candidate forum.

Wednesday night’s forum for the race to fill Michael D’Amato’s seat on the Common Council was surprisingly entertaining. About 300 people packed into the Miramar Theater to listen to the eight aspirants for the Third District Alderman seat state their case.

The evening provided more than the requisite drama, humor, and pathos befitting two hours at a theater and the audience left reasonably assured that at least some of the candidates offered the potential of representing the district competently. The February 19th primary will whittle the field down to two survivors who will run against each other on April 1st.

It was obvious that two of the candidates do not deserve consideration for advancement. One, Dan Fouliard, got the evening off to an unusual start by squandering the two minutes he was given to introduce himself to explain the leadership process he defined as “asking, advocating and achieving.” His insistence on including that alliterative phrase in all of his responses left many in the crowd scratching their heads, suppressing giggles and then just plain feeling embarrassed for the guy.

Another candidate, David Schroeder, also distinguished himself as another future also ran. Mr. Schroeder told the audience that he was motivated to run for the office when he discovered that contesting a parking ticket required him to personally appear at a downtown court. Clearly our local government needs someone like him to clean up its mess.

To his credit, Schroeder did not waste much time giving detailed responses to many of the questions. In most cases, he simply tapped on the table and admitted that he hadn’t given much thought to the issue.

Schroeder further endeared himself to the audience by declaring that rather than raising money for his campaign he was asking residents to contribute to other politicians they admire such as Sen. Russ Feingold. That suggestion generated his best reaction of the evening.

While Fouliard and Schroeder earned the label of the evening’s “Not Ready for Primetime Players,” they did provide some not altogether unwelcome comic relief. The other panelists, however, made somewhat more compelling arguments for their candidacies.

Sam McGovern-Rowen, a D’Amato aide, suggested that he had the most valuable experience since he has built relationships with the other aldermen and has answered the phone from residents and intimately knows their concerns. But he failed to communicate a vision and struggled awkwardly to avoid alienating voters who feel the current alderman has not been responsive enough to his constituents. He has his work cut out for him.

As the only woman on the dais, Sura Faraj appeared to have a natural advantage. The current Common Council is an all-male institution and many feel that just ain’t right. She also latched on to the zeitgeist of the 2008 Presidential campaign by calling herself the candidate for change (her web site is suraforchange.com).

Her experience includes serving as chair of the Riverwest Neighborhood Association and she spoke passionately in favor of slowing down the district’s excessive development, improving bike lanes and taking steps to address the high unemployment among Milwaukee’s black men.

Matt Nelson established himself as the most enthusiastic candidate, standing and smiling broadly as he delivered many of his responses. His eagerness to work in public transit as the solution to many of the city’s challenges, reflecting his involvement with the Milwaukee Transit Riders Union, caused his responses to began to sounding one-dimensional.

John Connelly worked in constituent services for former Mayor John O. Norquist and currently serves with the community prosecution unit assisting District Attorney John Chisholm. He may have hurt himself by trying to distance himself from the idealism of community activists.

“Unlike many of my opponents, I am not trying to save the world,” he said. “My goal is to serve the people of this district as effectively as possible.” Fair enough, but I suspect many in the audience wouldn’t mind voting for someone with a commitment to global preservation.

Patrick Flaherty made reference to having worked on city and state budgets without giving significant details but acquitted himself admirably as articulate and well-informed. After Flaherty made the point that, unlike others, he was not beholden to developers and other special interests, McGovern-Rowen called attention to the fact that Flaherty was referring to him.

He denied being in the pocket of any special interests except for his wife and his twin toddlers. His response seemed somehow reminiscent of Richard Nixon’s defense of his wife’s simple Republican cloth coat, and left one wondering why he had chosen to walk into that punch.

Nik Kovac came across as informed and articulate though his answer to a question about city services seemed to drift to other topics. He also took on McGovern-Rowen by challenging his assertion that the Sustainable Boulevards program was effective.

Overall, the evening amounted to a tantalizing Round One for this contest. Residents were given a good introduction to the contestants and there will be amble opportunities to learn more including future forums at the Gordon Park Pavilion (Locust and Humboldt) on Jan. 29 from 7-9 pm and at the Hi-Hat Garage (Brady and Arlington) on Jan. 30 also from 7-9.

Let democracy flourish like 10,000 flowers!