I had a couple flashbacks to 1994 while chatting with Uptown paper record political reporter Jim Morrill about Tuesday’s GOP primary results. Like CNN producers and many Beltway pundits reacting to the GOP wave of ’94, Morrill did not have a completely firm grasp of what just happened and who did it. The result is a slight confusion about what has transpired.
Matthew Ridenhour’s second place finish the at-large primary is indeed a bit of a surprise. Ridenhour is indeed a veteran of the Tea Party movement, as was candidate Craig Nannini, who did not make the cut. Indeed, Ridenhour used his Tea Party exposure to build a mailing list and a core group of supporters. That essentially was his campaign.
Where the Uptown account falters is describing Tariq Scott Bokhari as “another candidate identified with the Tea Party movement.” Bokari had run for office prior to the Tea Party movement, and although I think he is a fiscal conservative, one cannot identify him with the Tea Partiers to the extent you can a complete newcomer like Ridenhour. Lumping them together as Tea Party guys, as Uptown account does, oversimplifies matters.
There was also a sense among some local conservatives that Bokhari, endorsed by former mayor Richard Vinroot, was the insiders choice to be the designated “outsider” this cycle; the barbarian to be invited inside the city walls to help fight off the baser hordes. This view seriously disrupts the narrative the Uptown paper wants to give readers:
After their initial Washington D.C.-focused protests, Ridenhour and other Tea Party activists attempted to shift their focus to local issues. They attended local meetings where they protested the possibility of a second half-cent sales tax for mass transit, as well as a proposed county increase in stormwater fees.
After that initial surge, the movement appeared take a lesser role in local politics. When the City Council voted Monday to overturn Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory’s veto of spending $4.5 million to design a streetcar, the group took a less visible role. The only speaker was Bokhari, who urged that the veto be upheld.
If you believe that the whole streetcar veto issue was more manufactured political drama than actual fiscal matter of grave import — and certainly I do considering the reluctance of local Republicans to rule out spending $500m. on a streetcar — of course the Tea Partiers skipped Monday night’s performance while Bokhari supported the local GOP party line. This points to the fact that what matters is not Tea Party this or Tea Party that, but the principle of fiscal conservatism.
As I explained to Morrill, and thankfully a quote from a local woman covered the concept, it turns out that the totality of the size and cost of government at all levels is very much on voters minds right now. There is not so much “anger” as there is exasperation at the bone-headed policies now pursued by all levels of government. Candidates can appeal to that feeling in various ways and to varying degrees, but voters absolutely want to see some evidence that leaders are prioritizing and not ducking tough fiscal issues. Here is where things get interesting for Charlotte in November.
Ducking tough fiscal issues is what local leadership has been all about for the past decade. Will voters let another election pass without holding anyone accountable? We’re about to find out.
Bonus Observation: Just how much of a real, substantive non-issue was the veto override vote? The Charlotte Chamber took no position on it one way or the other. The Chamber won’t even say if the city or CATS should build the streetcar, but the group claims to support the Destination 2030 transit plan which includes a CATS-built streetcar. Quack, quack.
