Second Look at Anti-Incumbent Voting
Jun 2nd, 2010 by Timothy Pancoast
Many of my friends are anti-incumbent. However, I have been slow to join the anti-incumbent movement. I like to look at the candidates rather than generalize. I have a strong aversion to voting for someone because of their opponent. In spite of my personal preference the Dover City Council is starting to change my mind.
Every incumbent was voted back into the Dover City Council. I am not sure why. The city had a good slate of challengers this year. Last year the City Council made some tough choices in order to balance the budget without breaking the backs of the citizens of Dover. This year, right after an election where every candidate wanted to sound as much as possible like a small government fiscal conservative, now that they are all safe in their seats for 2 years, we get this… “Council’s draft includes tax hikes and pay raises.”
This is a huge insult to me. It should be an insult to every citizen of Dover as well. So much for “mandates.” They knew this was coming but no one, and I mean no one campaigned on tax hikes and pay raises. They campaigned against them. In the City Council elections all of the candidates, incumbents and challengers, ran on very similar principles, with only minor differences in executing those principles. What we see in the Council’s draft budget runs directly in the face of what we heard in the campaign.
To their credit, all but one of the recently elected (re-elected) candidates voted against the Council’s budget draft. Here, is my problem, the council members that weren’t up for election this cycle. Even if the incumbent you vote for is trustworthy and honest in representing you, the rest of the bureaucracy and elected officials often aren’t. They see an incumbent voted back in and take it as a sign that the status quo is safe and so are they. When an incumbent is unseated it sends a much clearer message. It reminds all of the elected officials that we hold them accountable. Their political office is in the hands of the people and the people expect results and respect or there will be consequences on election day.
My current stand: all other things being equal, I will vote the bums out. In fact unless I have a very good reason to vote for the incumbent rather than the challenger(s) I’ll be voting for new blood. If I see that the challenger runs contrary to my values and the incumbent stands with me then of course I’ll vote for the incumbent. If the difference between the incumbent and the challenger is just a matter of degrees I’ll be voting for the fresh face.
Timothy
I agree that voting the bums out is a must. I will look closely at each candidate and keep the few good ones in November.
Generalizing by saying, “vote all incumbents out,” is self-defeating and just a feel good vote. The hard choices should be made by educating ones self on the issues and looking up voting records. Let the facts stand on their own merits and forget the rhetoric that spews from the politician’s mouth. When the rubber meets the road, they will say anything to get re-elected and keep their income flowing smoothly.
I still haven’t jumped into the anti-incumbent movement with both feet, and will still cast an informed vote. However, incumbency is going to be a tie breaker for me now, and the incumbent will loose my vote, if only because of their colleagues that aren’t up for election.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tim Pancoast, DelawarePolitics.net. DelawarePolitics.net said: Second Look at Anti-Incumbent Voting: Many of my friends are anti-incumbent. However, I have been slow to join th… http://bit.ly/bMPvQi [...]
Tim Dover Council members are elected to 2 year terms. Those who got a pass this year are up in the spring of 2011. Get to work!!!!
Always vote with your eyes open. I agree with you that incumbency is not an asset to my mind. It is not a detriment either. You can no longer come to me and say vote for me because I have been there. My attitude is what did you do there? Answer well and you get my vote.
David that is my usual position. I am starting to see that the incumbent candidate’s behavior is not the only factor to consider when voting for a seat with an incumbent. I also have to cosider how the incumbent’s colleagues will respond to the different possible outcomes of the election. For my city council district McGlumphy was a good choice, he is often at odds with his fellow aldermen (which I consider a good thing) however the challengers also presented themselves as suitable choices and electing one of them would have sent a very different message to the rest of the City Council.
For me, if there are two viable candidates the balance is going to tip in favor of the challenger.
Tennessee, I am aware of how the City Council works and the time table of its elections, and trust me I will be all over that.
The message it would have sent to not reelect McGlumphy would have sent the wrong message. It would have said fighting for the people doesn’t matter. It would have sent exactly the opposite message that you want.
Some parents make that mistake. They get so concerned about punishing bad behavior that they forget rewarding good behavior is even more in determining the course than punishing bad behavior. The left is loyal to the people who are loyal to them. Our people seem to forget their friends over one or two disputes and forget about literally 1000′s of good things.
Once you find an honest guy who is willing to buck the system and fight to form a new majority over time, you had better stick with them. When you find someone who knows what he is doing and gets things done,you really need to keep them. When you find a true leader fighting for our interests and values, you would be crazy not to keep them.
Bill is that guy. The odds of finding another one no matter what they promise is small. If you do find one tell them to run next year so you can have two good council people.
The blind anti-incumbent movement is based upon ignorance, laziness, and stereotypes. It is punishing the innocent for the guilt of others. It is also counter productive because you can not discern any message from the result. Why change your behavior if the same people will vote against you and you lose the big government folks? It is a movement destined to fail because it has no vision, goals, or inspiration other than frustration or anger.
An informed movement is based upon education. It knows who is good and who is bad and has a plan to get to a governing majority with the right attitude. It has a vision like restoring Constitutional government or keeping spending under control and thereby taxes, for instance. It may be strategic and say if an incumbent is so so and the challenger is unproven, go for change and keep changing until we get someone dependable. Strategic destruction is scary to the establishment, but we may have to resort to it. That is where I think you are. Don’t let your frustration with the 5 turn you against the 4. We have 3 pretty solid votes on council and maybe I will just have to run to get to 5 so it is 5 to 4 the right way.
The Dover City Council could use a good challenge so I am all for anyone with some experience giving it to them.
The City Council is made up of individual Councilmen but they comprise on body. Right now the bulk of that body seems to be under the impression that it is working just fine when it isn’t. They see the re-election of all the incumbents as a sign that things are going well, and people are satisfied, but they are not.