At least three people asked me this week whether I think a growing trend toward party politics in the Town of Lansing was harming the town.  Each lamented the decline of civility in the town as each side draws lines in the sand on local issues that are significant in the town.  Statistics certainly seem to support this theory.  Look at the votes in local elections and it seems pretty clear that people are no longer voting for individuals in the town, but rather for the party line.

That means a big political shift for townspeople.  In a town that used to be almost entirely Republican, Democrats now outnumber Republicans.  At times it seems like one side  is being demonized by the other.  And it appears to be getting in the way of accomplishing things that may help the entire town.

The sewer is an easy example.  It would not be fair to say that party politics killed the project all by themselves, but they appear to have had a role.  The Town Board was clearly split along party lines, which also happen to be gender lines on the current board (and among the candidates running for two open seats in November).  Democrats were for it.  Republicans against.

During the Farkas administration the board was all Republican except for Connie Wilcox.  Wilcox was well respected by both sides, and Republicans even wanted her to run on their line on the ballot in addition to the Democratic line.  The Miller administration doesn't have that collegial feel.  This board is made up of three Democrats and two Republicans who are frequently at odds and don't all entirely seem to like each other.

I can't tell you whether I am seeing a fundamental philosophical conflict or party politics.  I have heard a lot of people say they think it is the latter.  I know all five board members to different extents, and I believe each and every one of them are on the board because of an earnest desire to serve and do the right thing for the town.  But it is also hard for me to tell, at times, how much political calculation is thrown into that mix.

Nobody I know likes the political divide in Washington.  President Obama promised he would cross party lines to do the people's work.  And he didn't.  President Bush before him made the same promise.  Same result.

A gallop poll earlier this year showed that  Americans rate the honesty and ethical standards of U.S. Senators a 14 out of 100.  Members of Congress rated 10.  The only people who rated below Members of Congress are car salespeople.  In case you are wondering, Nurses got the highest rating (85), followed by Pharmacists (75), Medical Doctors (70) and Engineers (70), Dentists (62) and Police officers (58).    Sad to say journalists didn't do so well -- we rated 24, only three points better than Business Executives!

My point is that in national politics the members of both parties rate embarrassingly low in the public eye.  I suspect that if Gallop had split out local politicians from national that the local representatives would have done much better than their Washington counterparts.  I liked local politics because for the longest time it seemed it was all about the individuals.  Their parties seemed incidental to what they might accomplish together for their communities.

Now a lot of people seem to think those days are over and the acid-reflux politics of Washington has finally seeped down the political esophagus to burn irrevocably into local politics.  The level of civility does anecdotally seem to be declining where local civic issues are concerned.  Are party politics trumping grass-roots government?  When I was asked what I thought it was hard to say it isn't happening.  I hope it's not.

v9i35