Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.
Scott Elliott is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He writes about education, city and suburban issues, politics, business, workforce and consumer issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > April > 02 > Entry
Ellen Belcher: Us vetting candidates might help you make choices
If I had a dollar for every time someone told me they wanted my job, I wouldn’t need to work.
That doesn’t happen so frequently when elections roll around. Not many people relish the idea of spending hours and hours with politicians.
It’s not so bad. More candidates than you probably think run for office because they want to give back. Sure, there are plenty of people with big egos running for big offices. But there are many, many more who run for city council or school board, knowing they’re committing to late-night meetings, tough decisions and dinners that are fun only if you like hard rolls and iceberg lettuce.
One task we on the editorial page take seriously is making judgments about people who run for office. Maybe that sounds arrogant. But think about it: How many people have time to make it their job to look into the qualifications and backgrounds of the individuals who decide our tax rates, make our laws and even send people to jail for life?
Do you have time to do that?
Voting requires a certain amount of homework if you’re serious about making informed choices. I’ve made decisions about whom not to vote for based on commercials. But I can’t think of a 30-second spot that has sold me on somebody.
Every election season the Dayton Daily News editorial board makes recommendations about selected races and issues. With the May 4 primary coming up, we started running our recommendations Friday; more are coming. We’ll be commenting on 18 races and issues.
Not an election goes by where we don’t get requests asking us to take a stand on a contest or issue because someone is doing something dastardly — at least in the opinion of the caller. But we also get complaints that we should stop telling people how to think.
There are scoundrels out there, and newspapers have a long record of exposing them. We like to think that one way to keep corrupt or inept people out of office is to shine a light on their views, ask them tough questions and dig into their backgrounds.
To those who think we should keep quiet, our response is easy: We offer our recommendations not because we’re trying to rule the world, but because judgments have to be made. Our views are just one source you can turn to.
Whether you’re buying a car or choosing whom to vote for, you invariably consider others’ opinions. If you think those opinions make sense, if you’ve come to trust someone’s thoughts, you’re likely to see that information as helpful. It’s certainly not a threat.
So how do we choose candidates and issues?
There are always more contests and issues than we can investigate. We consider things like the number of people who will be affected and the responsibility associated with the position; whether there’s been controversy about the office; and whether there’s a real contest.
Who decides whom we’ll recommend?
The editorial board includes Kevin Riley, our editor; editorial writers Martin Gottlieb and Scott Elliott and myself.
How do you decide?
We invite all the candidates to a question-and-answer session that can last well over an hour. We ask questions, we watch them interact, we read their resumes, we contact others who know them.
The process isn’t scientific, but you’d be surprised how much you can tell about a person in this setting. Candidates often say they’re grateful for the give-and-take.
Regarding issues and levies: We interview proponents. We check out their claims. If there’s organized opposition, we invite critics to the table, too.
How much do you pay attention to a candidate’s political party?
A person’s political party will tell you something about him or her, but certainly not everything. Plenty of elected officials diverge from their party’s positions on issues. We’ve recommended Republicans whom we didn’t agree with because they were the best qualified; same for Democrats.
Competence, intelligence and experience count for more than party affiliation.
Don’t you just endorse Democrats?
At the state level, we recommended Republican Bob Taft for governor in 1998 and 2002 and Republican George Voinovich in 1990 and 1994. In U.S. Senate races, we recommended Republican Mike De-Wine in 1994, 2000 and 2006; and Voinovich in 1998 and 2004.
At the local level, the Republicans we’ve recommended are way too numerous to even begin to list.
In presidential contests, we have consistently sided with Democrats.
In the end, our votes don’t count any more than yours. But we hope you’ll find our opinions and research helpful and worth your time.
Permalink | Comments (12) | Post your comment | Categories: Columns, Elections, Ellen Belcher
Tweet
Comments
By joe_mamma
April 5, 2010 4:01 PM | Link to this
An honest question here. Why should anyone with conservative or libertarian opinions take any stock in your endorsements? Ellen is a busy-body leftist, Martin is a closet socialist, Scott Elliott is probably at best a moderate, and I think it is safe to assume that Kevin Riley is far left.
By Martin Gottlieb
April 6, 2010 10:15 AM | Link to this
Taking the question as honest, if not necessarily the characterizations: Ideology is relevant in some races and not so much in others. Discussions about county administrative posts, school boards, municipal posts and others seldom revolve around ideology.
By joe_mamma
April 6, 2010 11:21 AM | Link to this
So you only interject ideology as a criteria for endorsement at the state and federal level? I’m sure I’m not the only person that finds that hard to believe.
By Harvey
April 6, 2010 12:58 PM | Link to this
I find that hard to believe. Actually I’ve found that in my case, the paper’s endorsements are a pretty good guide to who not to vote for.
By Anon
April 7, 2010 12:09 AM | Link to this
And where were you during the last Presidential election, where absolutely no one in the media vetted Mr. Obama? Oh I remember. It’s the same place you are now…in his back pocket. He continues to sell our national security down the river, has taken over more than 1/6th of our economy with this health care debacle, and has worked diligently to eliminate the private sector, and you think this is a good idea. What will you do when there’s no America left?
By R U Serious
April 7, 2010 8:33 AM | Link to this
All of your “endorsements” should include who is on the panel that makes the decision and their political party. It would give everyone an opportunity to understand if there is more to your “opinion” including your potential political biases.
By Joe Lacey
April 7, 2010 2:54 PM | Link to this
The last time the editorial board interviewed the Dayton Public School board candidates, Ms Belcher asked me if I regretted calling Gail Littlejohn and Kids First too “chummy”. I had never said anything like that and I never cared how close they were as friends. I told them that I had been critical of Kids First’s fiscal policies, especially the purchase of a new administration building, a purchase Mr Riley didn’t seem aware of. Scott Elliott asked me if I regretted suing the board for violation of open meeting law and I told him that I did not. In the days after that meeting, Scott contacted my fellow board members for a follow up. One of my colleagues said that it sounded like a fishing expedition in search of criticism of me. In their endorsement, they accused me of failing to bring the audit committee together. Had they called me or anyone who knew what was going on to confirm their story, they would have found out that the district administration had decided to use an already existing committee of local businessmen to provide outside review of our finances and that state audits would be reported directly to board members as is required of public corporations by law. The board has since voted to get rid of the separate audit committee upon administration recommendation. The editorial board made no effort to contact me even for a comment before they ran their story.
By Joe Lacey
April 7, 2010 3:01 PM | Link to this
The editorial board also asked me and we discussed what I had done for education but the printed endorsement ignored my efforts to bring a greater share of the district’s expenditures into the classroom. Instructional expenditures as a percentage of overall were at their lowest in the last years of Kids First, 47.56% according to the Ohio Department of Education. We are now on a rebound from that all time low.
By Jay
April 8, 2010 7:10 AM | Link to this
“There are scoundrels out there, and newspapers have a long record of exposing them. We like to think that one way to keep corrupt or inept people out of office is to shine a light on their views, ask them tough questions and dig into their backgrounds.” Really? I would say “use to have a record of exposing them”
By THE IMPLOSION OF DAYTON
April 8, 2010 12:00 PM | Link to this
What makes the DDN staff think they have more access to any more data than anybody else? It’s called THE INFORMATION AGE for a reason. In this case, what DDN calls “vetting” is simply steering people to vote in ways that DDN approves. I cannot believe anybody is THAT stupid……but then again….?
By THE IMPLOSION OF DAYTON
April 8, 2010 12:01 PM | Link to this
What makes the DDN staff think they have more access to any more data than anybody else? It’s called THE INFORMATION AGE for a reason. In this case, what DDN calls “vetting” is simply steering people to vote in ways that DDN approves. I cannot believe anybody is THAT stupid……but then again….?
By David Esrati
April 13, 2010 10:33 AM | Link to this
I’ve yet to see the editorial board actually expose any of the scoundrels- or scoundrel like behavior. Illegal secret meetings of the type Mr. Lacy and I have railed about for years seem to get a hall pass from them. Deb Feldman can do no wrong- nor did the county commissioners get a smackdown for their attempt to raise the hotel motel tax for Randy Gunlocks ice rink at Austin Road- the Dayton City Commission only started legal publication of agendas after the candidate they railed against- got elected against all odds and forced compliance with the laws. Fact is- the DDN does more to hinder the public from researching candidates with their stunted website- read more here: http://esrati.com/the-tough-work-of-ellen-belcher-you-betcha/4756/ And, I never expect an endorsement at these kangaroo court sessions- but I do enjoy watching incumbents squirm when the real questions get thrown out by me- instead of the Editorial board. Nan Whaley couldn’t answer how she deserved $5,500 in donations from a demolition contractor from Westerville Ohio in the last race- and it seemed as if that was the first the editorial board had even heard of the donation. All candidates should have a blog for voters to evaluate. That would be a better start than any editorial board screening.