DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN 2006: CHEAP SHOTS AND CRACKPOT PRAGMATISM?
Brewed Fresh Daily links to state senator Marc Dann's blog, which links to a Monday Plain Dealer story about the state's Third Frontier Internship program, in which "a spokesman for the Democratic party" says: "We're now using borrowed money to pay for these things, and I don't think people voted to use their bond money on internships. I think it's pretty outrageous."
Of course this is complete BS. No one is using bond money for any Third Frontier program, because no such money exists -- the ballot issue just passed two weeks ago and authorizing legislation has yet to be introduced. The current "Third Frontier Internship" program is supported by Federal Workforce Investment Act funds. Whether it's a good idea or not is, of course, open to debate, but this is the first time I've heard Democrats complaining about it. The internship program has been part of the Taft Third Frontier operation since 2003. I'm curious whether Senator Dann (or Mr. Rothenberg, the Party "spokesman") raised any objections to it before just about every Democrat in the General Assembly voted to put Issue 1 on the November ballot.
(It's too bad the PD didn't bother to check out the "payola/corporate welfare" angle with some of the Cleveland companies that are sponsoring 3F interns through Tri-C's Unified Technology Center, presumably with the enthusiastic blessings of Senators Prentiss, Brady and Fingerhut.)
As a partisan Democrat, this kind of lame cheap-shotting just drives me nuts -- especially when my party's "leadership" substitutes it for the hard work of coming up with better approaches to serious issues. Wasn't that John Glenn I saw fronting the Issue 1 commercials? If the Taft Third Frontier model is "corporate welfare", where's the Democrats' alternative program for driving high-tech job development? Do we have some better way than the 3F internships to get Ohio college students engaged with local tech companies? How would the Democrats do it better?
Of course Dann and Rothenberg don't want to talk about that -- all that matters is that there's a possible "pay to play" angle here (some internship money went to an organization connected to House Speaker Husted). Who cares about the actual merits of the program you're discrediting?
A few days ago, I spoke with a Democratic state representative who complained that the House Democratic leadership is actively discouraging its members from pushing alternative legislative proposals, in the belief that attempts to legislate will just get in the way of exploiting the corruption issue.
The correct term for this is "crackpot pragmatism"... and it's the best possible way for the Ohio Democratic Party to elect another Republican Governor -- probably one named Ken Blackwell.