PART II:  POLITICS AT BAY

Chapter 5:  Post Election

I believe that a humanity focus is greatly huge versus a campaign strategy of knocking on doors.  If you want to win office and stay in office in this century, you do what your constituents wish of you.  In collecting my signatures, due to the longevity of some of my conversations and the diversity of those with whom I spoke, I had a solid understanding of the hopes and dreams of those in my district.  In addition, I had the opportunity to further shape my opinions on the issues.  My partner did the programming to aid in me creating an extensive website outlining my campaign, and I touched on every issue one could imagine.  I struggled with the state party in getting a link from their website to my campaign site, but they eventually displayed the link.

From spurring job creation to bringing healthcare costs down, I had solutions.  My vision included controlled concealed carry gun control laws to coined phrases I created such as “balancing the tax base” and “jobs from new energies.”  I found compromises and solutions to every issue I encountered.  I did research into bio diesel and focused on how our state could benefit from the work of Michael Briggs from the University of New Hampshire, and I outlined the benefits anaerobic digestion could have in our dairy state.  I outlined how to ease our property tax burden to how to reorganize our small business development centers.

Some of my biggest contributions were handling social issues such as gay marriage and stem cell research.  Governor Dean found a marriage compromise in Vermont, and I hoped to span that compromise across the country.  I later spoke with the DNC on the phone regarding specific verbiage, and this was utilized by the top Presidential candidates in 2008.  Even though I placed copyright statements on my campaign site, everything was taken by other candidates and the party as a whole.  I ended up gaining national attention behind the scenes for my ideas, however, and my campaign played a big role in revamping the Democratic Party platform and strategic initiatives.

Teacher union members proved to be the most educated, helpful, and connected politics wise with labor a close second.  However, a good portion of my financial contributions came from friends and family.  Surprisingly, I only had about $300 in gay community donations.  At first, our local gay bar owner would not even let me hand out campaign material in the bar even though I was trying to help our community, among others.  I was able to disperse literature at the bar once I was on the radio covering two major metropolitan areas, however.  I had no option to be so broad in advertising as our location crosses listener ship of the radio stations.  So, even though I was targeting a little over 30,000 people, I was actually reaching out to and heard by millions upon millions of people from rock to country and public radio to public television.

I filled out most of the lobbyist questionnaires even if I didn’t 100% agree with everything.  That was against traditional PAC (Political Action Committee) rules for politics, but I did the right thing.  Compromise was my campaign’s major theme.  Project Vote Smart I liked as I pretty much got to lay out a budget for all to see and tie everything together.  Another “non-partisan” survey, similar to Project Vote Smart, decided to do a little editing of my photo before they put it online.  The changes were not positive, but they did eventually get an accurate version online.

The other advertising methods used were direct mail, newspaper ads, and yard signs.  Yard signs were difficult as I did not have a sign list beyond approximately twenty-five requests.  What I decided to do was stop at any house that had another Democrat’s sign in their yard, introduce myself, and ask if I could put my sign in their yard.  I had a few turn me down, but my partner and I managed to get about 200 yard sign locations in a matter of two weeks.  I targeted highways and busy county roads for maximum visibility.  I also hosted events that served appetizers, but the attendance was minimal.

When the local news gave their endorsement to the incumbent, while stating I had no ideas that had any real promise, I was shocked.  In a pretend world, they must have wanted to pick the winner versus what would have been best for the district.  I responded with a press release noting some of my ideas, including a variable sales tax to increase market share for companies that create jobs in our state, new business incubation focusing on our Small Business Development Centers and Chambers of Commerce, tax cuts / credits based on net gain in employees to attract fast growing companies to our state, tax incentives for dairy farmers to contribute electricity and bio-fuel through fields and biomass, pro-rating property taxes to begin immediately based on market / sale value, further reducing local tax payer burdens by slightly increasing tourism taxes, a new business form for non-for-profit healthcare companies to keep hospital costs down, tax free 401K and IRA withdrawals for medical expenses, and a hybrid DNR / Building Inspector to reduce taxes while protecting consumers from automatic permit approvals.

Three years later, our Governor had given millions of dollars in grants for anaerobic digestion, we had test bio-fuel fields, our Small Business Development Centers had been reorganized with a twist of my vision, efforts were being made to actually balance the tax base versus name gimmick legislation, the DNR raised it’s rates to gain more revenue from tourists, the Republican controlled federal legislature created tax free medical expense withdrawals from retirement accounts, the Kerry Edwards campaign pushed my tax cuts / credits based on net gain in employees for companies in the 2004 race, and the Governor of Indiana considered a variable sales tax in his 2004 race.  Our local newspaper’s endorsement was false in claim, and I have wondered if they ever regretted their lack of integrity.  Given my vision and the corruption of our government, I encountered unfriendly backlash in early 2005.