OPINION & EDITORIAL
A clear choice for District 5
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Letters to the Editor:
- Dismiss anti-nuclear myth (March 26, 2008)
- No new nukes: Use solar, wind power (March 24, 2008)
- Herald wrong to print abortion ad (March 13, 2008)
- Contrary to common contention, religion inspires inquiry (March 12, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Oh, look how they've grown! (March 27, 2008)
- A fool's errand (March 27, 2008)
- Stopping Dane's District 5 yawn (January 29, 2008)
- Calling on your interest, activism (January 21, 2008)
- SAFE bet: Smathers neglects need (March 5, 2008)
by Letters to the Editor
Friday, March 28, 2008
As a female graduate student of color who studies public management and public policy, I thought it might be helpful for the campus to have a new perspective on the race for Dane County District 5 supervisor.
I attended the debate Wednesday between Wyndham Manning and Conor O’Hagan hosted by the Roosevelt Institution and WISPIRG. There are four major concerns that cast serious doubt on Mr. O’Hagan’s ability to lead, to collaborate and to innovate as a policymaker, regulator or advocate:
1. His immaturity and superficial breadth of knowledge, which both became apparent when he was pressed for details and depth on his platform and current political issues.
Mr. O’Hagan presented conflicting ideas and priorities when admitting that the first sector he would cut funding from is the environment, while also identifying the environment as one of his platform pillars. At the end of the debate, the candidates were able to ask one question of the other. Mr. Manning successfully was able to delegitimize Mr. O’Hagan’s environmental platform. Mr. Manning had to explain to Mr. O’Hagan the problem and the causes of algae in our lakes before Mr. O’Hagan could even answer the question.
2. His inability to articulate clear policy goals, community outcomes or funding sources.
Not only did Mr. O’Hagan present incomplete policy alternatives, superficial platform issues and factually incorrect information, he also failed to admit when he needed more information. That is an incredibly immature mistake — as a representative, you can’t always have an answer. Sometimes, you have to do your homework and then formulate an educated opinion.
Mr. Manning effectively acknowledged that the county board would have a substantial learning curve. He admitted that certain questions posed could not and should not be answered without more complete information. That’s responsible leadership.
3. Mr. O’Hagan’s obtuse perception of balance.
Balancing mechanical engineering studies by “choosing his class times” is a freshman idea. Mr. O’Hagan must consider the time and energy the county board and other obligations might demand and be able to fully commit to them.
One of the most important policy ideas I took away from the debate was when Mr. Manning announced his willingness and intentions to bring politics to campus rather than “host office hours.” Politicians engaging their constituents is a far more effective and innovative approach than relying on them to wander into office hours regardless of where they are held.
4. His seemingly innocuous, yet politically dense lack of understanding that the boundaries of this county extend far beyond the boundaries of the campus.
While the constituents in District 5 have clear alliances and interests in the isthmus, as a public servant one must also be able to holistically evaluate policy recommendations by advocating for their constituents’ interests but by also being fully cognizant of the needs of the entire county. Mr. O’Hagan’s taxi ride service (with the misnomer of an expanded SAFEride) and the commitment to “Up not Out” urban planning are nearsighted, superficial visions for downtown Madison. They ignore the needs of the rural and agricultural parts of Dane County and the less urbanized, less affluent areas of Madison.
I have had the pleasure of working with Mr. Manning on the Wisconsin Union Directorate since 2005. He has grown substantially in the past three years and while I have not always agreed with his choices or decisions, I wholeheartedly believe he is the best candidate for this position.
Wyndham offers the unique ability to ask good questions and challenge the status quo. He has the experience in building coalitions and outreach/feedback mechanisms. He has the time, energy and maturity to give the county board its due diligence, and he has a strong track record of innovative programming and solution-based budgeting.
Wyndham has the ability to lead; he asks poignant questions and is rational, yet decidedly passionate. He is politically mature and refreshingly candid.
I wholly support and endorse Wyndham Manning and hope you will as well this Tuesday.
Shayna Hetzel
UW Master of Public Affairs candidate, 2008
shaynahetzel@wisc.edu
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 1:16am):
Prediction: Conor will win 53-47. That's votes, not percentages.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 1:28am):
As long as a "female graduate student of color" is in favor of Manning, I don't know how I could be against him.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 1:36am):
"As a female graduate student of color who studies public management and public policy"
why does the wavelength of light reflected by your skin have anything to do with your perspective on the district 5 race
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 2:35am):
1:36--
Because other people see the "wavelength of light reflected by your skin," and as a result you're treated differently and have different structural opportunities available to you. Thus, you would often have a different outlook. It's like saying that a chromosome shouldn't affect your perspective.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 7:17am):
I think it's an interesting perspective because if you look at their campaign teams and the people that attend the candidates' meetings and the debate--there aren't many females and there aren't many people of color.
However, over 15% of Dane County is a person of color (many of whom Wyndham and COnnor's policies are aimed at in terms of regional planning, lower income transportation needs, recipients of social services, etc.) and over 50% of Dane County is female.
It is a little biased, however, that she knows Wyndham and knew him prior.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 9:06am):
Glad to hear you're female and "of color." What color eyes do you have? Because I really can't judge the merits of your views without knowing that.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 9:35am):
just remember: the college "democrats" endorsed that clown.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 9:48am):
"why does the wavelength of light reflected by your skin have anything to do with your perspective on the district 5 race"
Why does it matter to you, Anon @ 1:36?
This is a nice letter but doesn't show the fact that both candidates are incredibly weak and will likely underperform for their constituents, largely because no one around here took this election seriously. Let O'Hagan and Manning be a lesson about how apathy can turn our government to crap.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 11:49am):
"One of the most important policy ideas I took away from the debate was when Mr. Manning announced his willingness and intentions to bring politics to campus rather than “host office hours.” Politicians engaging their constituents is a far more effective and innovative approach than relying on them to wander into office hours regardless of where they are held."
(neither in support or opposition to your op-ed)
Why can't they do both? :)
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 11:52am):
"why does the wavelength of light reflected by your skin have anything to do with your perspective on the district 5 race"
Maybe you do not understand that multifaceted dimensions of one's identity contributes to a different interpretation of an event, an issue, and even a lifestyle.
Perhaps yours is called white privilege--having the privilege of not being socially conscious about your race/ethnicity and its implications of how you're evaluated and prejudged by society.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 12:10pm):
Would that be a "typical" student of color?
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 12:58pm):
White skin is some magical key into the land of privilege.
How is that not racist?
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 1:42pm):
"How is that not racist?"
Get with the PC narrative, only whites can be "racist". Non-whites are just being "socially conscious".
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 2:30pm):
**White skin is some magical key into the land of privilege.**
"Isms," including racISM are relative to power dynamics and privilege.
It is not my responsibility to provide you with a self awareness tool, but get a clue, man! Read some Peggy McIntosh.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 3:41pm):
Wow these comment boards are continuously filled with this psuedo-intellectual, hippie, liberal college shit.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 3:51pm):
"Perhaps yours is called white privilege--having the privilege of not being socially conscious about your race/ethnicity and its implications of how you're evaluated and prejudged by society."
If you're concerned about prejudice, you should support the comments on this blog.
The author of this LTE is calling on readers to engage in prejudice by revealing her sex and race - factors that are not relevant to her views.
And it is ideas like "white privilege" that are inherently prejudiced. It's judging people by their skin color without regard for their actual ideas and experiences. Now THAT is prejudice!
Racism is evil no matter how you spell it.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 4:10pm):
""Isms," including racISM are relative to power dynamics and privilege."
No, racism means judging people by their race. You can't just redefine concepts out of existence whenever you feel like it.
"Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man's genetic lineage—the notion that a man's intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors."
-Ayn Rand "The Virtue of Selfishness"
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 4:18pm):
"How is that not racist?"
Because, as countless studies have shown, if a white person and a racial minority are completely equal in all other regards, the white person will receive preferential treatment (except in the rare instances when a person of color holds decision making power, such as a boss, but there's also specific reasons for that). Take jobs. One study in particular submitted identical resumes to employers, only one had a "white" name and the other an "ethnic" name. The "white" applicant received callbacks at a much higher rate than the other applicant.
So, even if you're a poor white, you're likely to receive better treatment from society as a whole than even middle to upper-class minorities.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 4:19pm):
WWBOS?
What Would Barack Obama Say?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_9al4IQOhk
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 5:22pm):
"So, even if you're a poor white, you're likely to receive better treatment from society as a whole than even middle to upper-class minorities."
Then why do poor white people exist??!?!?
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 8:03pm):
part of the national discussion of race?
maybe barack was right after all...
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 11:21pm):
As someone who knows Shayna personally, let me just say that her endorsement cements my vote...for O'Hagan. If someone as arrogant and self-righteous as her can support Manning, he can't be any good.
Anonymous (March 28, 2008 @ 11:26pm):
"One study in particular submitted identical resumes to employers, only one had a "white" name and the other an "ethnic" name. The "white" applicant received callbacks at a much higher rate than the other applicant."
Suppose this is true. If some employers are turning away qualified people simply on the basis of race, what is the proper reaction?
Should we then start judging EVERYONE on the basis of race, saying that whites are privileged and blacks are victims, even though this is clearly not true? Or, should we condemn the actual people who are racist, and praise those who are not?
Also, whites are NOT privileged by racist employers anymore than blacks are privileged by racist affirmative action programs. Racism is irrational and is no good for anyone. The way to fight racism is to treat people as individuals, not as collectives.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
