Submitted by Ohio Daily Blog on Wed, 09/10/2008 - 06:07.
Former congressman Louis Stokes is the guest on "Sound of Ideas" on Cleveland public radio station WCPN from now until 10:00 a.m. this morning, where he will talk about the unofficial screening committee he formed with Mayor Frank Jackson to make a "recommendation" to county party executive committee members about who they should select as a replacement to Stephanie Tubbs Jones on the November 4th congressional ballot. That vote will occur on Thursday, September 11th, at 7:30 p.m.
The committee has been criticized for excluding the press and public from their lengthy meeting on Monday, during which they heard from all eight candidates. After the meeting, the committee endorsed former Tubbs Jones Chief of Staff and current suburban mayor Marcia Fudge (D-Warrensville). The identity of the 19 members of the screening committee were not divulged prior to the making of the recommendation. [The members are listed here.]
UPDATE: Answers by the candidates to a 12-question issues questionnaire, submitted by several members of the executive committee, are available here and here. The call-in number for the show is (866) 578-0903.
2d UPDATE: Marilyn Karfield of the Cleveland Jewish News referred to criticism that the committee was not representative of the diversity of the district, which is 45% 40% white and has some 55,000 Jews. There wasn't a full listing of screening committee members, but it included six African-American ministers and several African-American elected officials. Karfield said there was one Jewish legislator.
Stokes came on the show and denied that the screening committee supplanted the official process of a vote by executive committee members who live in the 11th District, saying that their selection is only a recommendation and isn't binding on anyone.
3d UPDATE: Cleveland Councilman Mike Polensek is now on, emphasizing a meeting at party headquarters at 5:00 p.m. today at which Democratic Party ward leaders will interview and discuss the candidates. [He does not know whether the ward leaders will make a recommendation or not.] His view is that there should be a vetting process within the party, not just a recommendation by an ad hoc committee. Polensek also emphasized the importance of the district as being majority African-American but also having the most Jews of any congressional district in Ohio as well as a big concentration of Eastern Europeans and other ethnic groups. Stokes is back, emphasizing that his committee was not meant to preempt meetings by anyone else who wants to have one. Stokes admits that the process could have been done better ("we made some mistakes"), and that the committee could have been larger and more representative. He is emphasizing that everything had to happen quickly, and insists that he wasn't responsible for excluding the press.
4th UPDATE: Stokes said that there was some discussion after the candidate presentations and before the committee vote, but candidates weren't brought up -- he says it was a discussion just about the district. Stokes has no comment to a caller who implied that the committee was strong-arming the process to make sure a black person is elected, saying only that the comment is racist. Karfield brought up a lawsuit over the drawing of the 11th District that went all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that it is constitutional to create a majority-black district to ensure that African Americans have some representation in Congress. Stokes emphasizes that he and Rep. Tubbs Jones were the only black members of Congress from Ohio ever.
5th UPDATE:The show is over. The second to last caller said that there should have been at least one white candidate among the eight candidates under consideration. Stokes pointed out that the committee didn't choose who decided to run, and emphasized that he and Rep. Tubbs Jones strove to represent all the residents of the district equally without regard to race. The last caller praised Stokes for showing leadership by convening the screening committee and essentially said that any faults in the vetting process are attributable to the suddenness and horrific timing of the loss, coming so soon before the election.
I am one of the members of the executive committee who will be voting tomorrow night. I agree with some of the criticisms of the Stokes/Jackson screening committee and feel that it's recommendation shouldn't be afforded as much weight as it would have received if the process were less hurried and more open. However, I feel like there is quite a lot of information available, considering the circumstances. I have read the questionnaire responses on issues by the candidates and have heard from a variety of people promoting one or another candidate. It is not an easy choice because a number of the candidates are very close on the issues and comparably strong on credentials. I don't feel bound by the committee's recommendation at all and don't see it as having an undue influence over my vote, although it is a factor.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Recent comments
5 weeks 1 day ago
5 weeks 4 days ago
7 weeks 4 days ago
10 weeks 6 days ago
12 weeks 17 hours ago
12 weeks 4 days ago
12 weeks 4 days ago
12 weeks 4 days ago
14 weeks 1 day ago
14 weeks 1 day ago