I, Renee Price, am excited to announce my decision to run for election to the Orange County Board of County Commissioners.
I will be running for the District 2 seat to represent the people of Hillsborough, Efland and the beautiful rural areas of Orange County—from the southern part of White Cross to the northern tip of Cedar Grove.
Why do I want to spend hours and days in meetings and reading pages of agenda packets? Because I care.
The people of Orange County need a bigger voice and a bolder presence at the table when decisions are made that affect the quality of our lives. All of us have a stake in the process as we proceed to meet the challenges of the day.
Since 1990, Orange County has been my home; the people of this county have become my friends and family; and I am passionate about our community. Therefore, I am ready to push the envelope for:
n excellence in education and opportunities for a broad spectrum of students.
n small business expansion, rural economic development and living-wage jobs.
n stewardship of our natural resources and living environment.
The Republican-dominated legislature slashed our school budgets; yet we still have to maintain public school buildings and rehire our teachers and staff. The bank bailout, though it had good intentions, short-changed the 99 percent; so, this is a time to invest in ourselves, at the local level. And the Eno River is an amazing ecosystem; we have to protect these natural areas from irresponsible development and activities such as roadways and intense land uses that would threaten our water supplies.
My goal is to pursue creative ways and means to boost our local economy, reduce unemployment, combat hunger, inspire our young people, assist our senior citizens and promote energy efficiency. Tourism is one industry that has begun to make a significant impact in Orange County’s revenue stream.
The time is long overdue to use innovation in providing essential services and facilities. We need a progressive agenda while at the same time assuring that our tax revenues are spent wisely.
As we think about new agendas, I believe that we must hold fast to the concept that government is for the people and by the people. The decision-making process in our county currently needs improvement in two areas, and, when elected, I intend to promote:
n collaboration with other local governments—both within and beyond our borders.
n open government, government that is transparent and that responds to the people.
These two elements are key for effective leadership and for building community.
Orange County has much to offer and much of which to be proud—our diverse cultural heritage, a thriving arts community, working farms, value-added production, service organizations, volunteer rural fire departments, health and wellness centers, brilliant minds and talented individuals.
I look forward to working with the members of this community in guiding Orange County on a path to a sustainable future. My campaign is about fiscal accountability and about social, environmental and economic justice for the people of Orange County.
See what ended up on The News of Orange County's cutting room floor.
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Bernadette Pelissier to run for re-election to BOCC
I am announcing my candidacy for a second term to an at-large seat on the Orange County Board of Commissioners. In my first term, I helped build the infrastructure and framework to facilitate economic development. I helped cut the budget while preserving quality services. I strongly advocated for the increased public input and openness of government.
If re-elected, I will work tirelessly to promote economic resilience, secure the fiscal sustainability and expand the non-residential tax base by creating new jobs for Orange County residents that support our community values of social equity, environmental health and economic vitality.
I will continue to encourage a sense of common-cause community where all sectors of the county, rural and urban, cooperate towards achieving common community goals. I will support creation of the integrated, cross-county and region transit infrastructure needed for the future.
I would be honored and delighted to continue serving the residents of Orange County and work towards achieving the goals shared with many residents.
If re-elected, I will work tirelessly to promote economic resilience, secure the fiscal sustainability and expand the non-residential tax base by creating new jobs for Orange County residents that support our community values of social equity, environmental health and economic vitality.
I will continue to encourage a sense of common-cause community where all sectors of the county, rural and urban, cooperate towards achieving common community goals. I will support creation of the integrated, cross-county and region transit infrastructure needed for the future.
I would be honored and delighted to continue serving the residents of Orange County and work towards achieving the goals shared with many residents.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Column: Does time heal all wounds?
By D.G. Martin
UNC-TV host
Will John Edwards someday be the new Newt Gingrich?
Where did this crazy question come from? To get the answer, read on.
First, we should wrestle with the questions political experts have been stuttering over since Gingrich’s stunning upset of Mitt Romney in the South Carolina Republican presidential primary last weekend.
How can a candidate like Gingrich get over the deathblows his campaign suffered in Iowa and New Hampshire?
How can he sidestep the disgrace from the damning condemnation of his colleagues in the House of Representatives who censured him for misconduct 15 years ago?
How can he get around the moral consequences of his conduct in the breakup of two earlier marriages?
How does he get around the lack of support from people who worked with him when he was House speaker?
How does he get around the panic shown by so-called establishment Republicans who believe his nomination for president would lead to a disaster for their party in the fall?
How can these questions be answered? It would be easy to say, simply, that South Carolina voters are different. From John C. Calhoun to Strom Thurmond, South Carolinians have shown a fondness for brilliant, confrontational, no-holds-barred, attack- dog politicians. Newt fit their bill. But what about other states?
Both Calhoun and Thurmond had fans in other states. How about Gingrich? We will begin to find out next week in Florida.
Whatever the results in Florida and elsewhere, Gingrich has shown that time really can heal old wounds in politics. Even the most conservative religious voters in South Carolina showed that they were willing to forgive the sins of a seemingly penitent person.
The South Carolina results show us that, after the passage of time, voters are not bound by earlier judgments about a politician’s sins.
John Edwards may be trying to take advantage of this lesson.
The health problem that was the basis for the delay in his trial is a real one. An irregular heartbeat has bothered Edwards for many years. Still, delay may be part of his trial team’s strategy.
Every delay puts the management of the trial further away from the influence of the zealous investigation and prosecution led by former U.S. Attorney George Holding. He is running for Congress rather than continuing to lead the determined effort to put Edwards in jail.
Greater and greater distance from Holding increases the possibility that less-driven prosecutors will see the benefits of making a deal with Edwards that would free them to concentrate their efforts on getting other criminals off the streets.
Every delay works to distance the minds of potential jurors from the heavy and negative publicity that accompanied Edwards’s downfall. With the passing of time, jurors may be less likely to punish Edwards simply for being the bad person the news stories made him out to be.
Every delay lessens public interest in the case and the strength of any public demand that he be held accountable.
Every delay puts the public’s memory further away from his relevance as a public figure whose extraordinary gifts almost made him a vice president, almost a president.
Thus every delay could increase the chances that Edwards will win an acquittal if the case ultimately goes to trial or, even more likely, that there will be an acceptable plea bargain offer from prosecutors.
Back to our opening question: If Edwards does walk away from his legal troubles, could he, with the passage of time—say 10 years from now—bring his gifts of persuasion and charisma back into the political arena and have some of those who have written him off today declare him to be the new Newt Gingrich?
D.G. Martin hosts UNC-TV’s "North Carolina Bookwatch," which airs Sundays at 5 p.m. For more information or to view prior programs, visit the webpage at www.unctv.org/ncbookwatch.
UNC-TV host
Will John Edwards someday be the new Newt Gingrich?
Where did this crazy question come from? To get the answer, read on.
First, we should wrestle with the questions political experts have been stuttering over since Gingrich’s stunning upset of Mitt Romney in the South Carolina Republican presidential primary last weekend.
How can a candidate like Gingrich get over the deathblows his campaign suffered in Iowa and New Hampshire?
How can he sidestep the disgrace from the damning condemnation of his colleagues in the House of Representatives who censured him for misconduct 15 years ago?
How can he get around the moral consequences of his conduct in the breakup of two earlier marriages?
How does he get around the lack of support from people who worked with him when he was House speaker?
How does he get around the panic shown by so-called establishment Republicans who believe his nomination for president would lead to a disaster for their party in the fall?
How can these questions be answered? It would be easy to say, simply, that South Carolina voters are different. From John C. Calhoun to Strom Thurmond, South Carolinians have shown a fondness for brilliant, confrontational, no-holds-barred, attack- dog politicians. Newt fit their bill. But what about other states?
Both Calhoun and Thurmond had fans in other states. How about Gingrich? We will begin to find out next week in Florida.
Whatever the results in Florida and elsewhere, Gingrich has shown that time really can heal old wounds in politics. Even the most conservative religious voters in South Carolina showed that they were willing to forgive the sins of a seemingly penitent person.
The South Carolina results show us that, after the passage of time, voters are not bound by earlier judgments about a politician’s sins.
John Edwards may be trying to take advantage of this lesson.
The health problem that was the basis for the delay in his trial is a real one. An irregular heartbeat has bothered Edwards for many years. Still, delay may be part of his trial team’s strategy.
Every delay puts the management of the trial further away from the influence of the zealous investigation and prosecution led by former U.S. Attorney George Holding. He is running for Congress rather than continuing to lead the determined effort to put Edwards in jail.
Greater and greater distance from Holding increases the possibility that less-driven prosecutors will see the benefits of making a deal with Edwards that would free them to concentrate their efforts on getting other criminals off the streets.
Every delay works to distance the minds of potential jurors from the heavy and negative publicity that accompanied Edwards’s downfall. With the passing of time, jurors may be less likely to punish Edwards simply for being the bad person the news stories made him out to be.
Every delay lessens public interest in the case and the strength of any public demand that he be held accountable.
Every delay puts the public’s memory further away from his relevance as a public figure whose extraordinary gifts almost made him a vice president, almost a president.
Thus every delay could increase the chances that Edwards will win an acquittal if the case ultimately goes to trial or, even more likely, that there will be an acceptable plea bargain offer from prosecutors.
Back to our opening question: If Edwards does walk away from his legal troubles, could he, with the passage of time—say 10 years from now—bring his gifts of persuasion and charisma back into the political arena and have some of those who have written him off today declare him to be the new Newt Gingrich?
D.G. Martin hosts UNC-TV’s "North Carolina Bookwatch," which airs Sundays at 5 p.m. For more information or to view prior programs, visit the webpage at www.unctv.org/ncbookwatch.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Column: Replacing elections with lotteries
By D.G. Martin
UNC-TV host
There has to be a better way.
Some of us reached that conclusion after discussing the mess our congressional and legislative governing systems have come to.
Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government “except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
I wonder if he would agree today, after taking a look at the U.S. Congress deadlocked by political divisiveness and mean-spirited partisan competition that stifle almost every effort to deal with challenges crying out for practical responses.
Instead of being free to work fulltime with their colleagues on the nitty-gritty work of crafting legislation, our representatives are slaves to a system that requires them to spend most of their time on electoral politics and fundraising.
Taxpayers pay them to be legislators. But keeping those jobs requires them to do something else altogether.
The time spent raising money and the obligations that come with begging money from people and organizations that want something takes more than just time away from the job. It drains away the independent judgment of the legislator.
So does the extreme loyalty to political parties, to the caucus and to the legislative leadership. The demands to stick together handicap the prospects for working on solutions that do not fit into the agenda of one of the political groups.
Efforts to maintain control lead to ugly games of gerrymandering and pandering to voting groups.
How could we find a system that frees our elective representatives from the servitude of full-time fundraising, from the draining of energy and spirit that go with permanent campaigns and from the tribal commitments to political caucuses and parties? How could we free them from these things so they could spend full time working on legislation to make our state and nation better?
Somebody asked, what about a lottery? Why not just select our representatives by lottery?
That suggestion sounded like a joke.
At first.
What could be more antithetical to democracy than putting aside citizen participation and simply choosing representatives by lot?
But, after I thought about it a minute, some advantages were apparent. No need to raise money. No permanent campaigns. No automatic partisan divides on every question. And, with modern computer techniques, a legislature that could be composed of people that would closely reflect the population, geographically, ethnically, gender, age and otherwise.
Of course, somebody said, you would have a whole bunch of people who would have no idea what they were doing. Then, somebody else said, neither do most newly elected legislators!
Still, making important selections by chance is just not the way we do things in America, is it?
One person quietly mentioned that we get our jury pools by random selection. The jury system is not perfect. But Americans have a pretty strong commitment to it. It works without the problems of partisan bickering and gamesmanship, fundraising or time-consuming political campaigns.
All this may be true, but selecting representatives by lottery would be an unprecedented violation of the democratic tradition that began in ancient Greece.
Or would it?
Actually, the selection of many major officers in Athens was by allotment or a random process. According to the “New World Encyclopedia,” “Election was seen as less democratic and open to corruption because it would favor the rich (who could buy votes) and the eloquent, whereas a lottery gave everyone an equal chance to participate and experience, in Aristotle’s words, ‘ruling and being ruled in turn.’ ”
So, am I ready to lead an effort to replace elections with a lottery selection process?
Not today.
But check with me after Nov. 6.
D.G. Martin hosts UNC-TV’s "North Carolina Bookwatch," which airs Fridays at 9:30 p.m. and Sundays at 5 p.m. For more information or to view prior programs, visit the webpage at www.unctv.org/ncbookwatch.
UNC-TV host
There has to be a better way.
Some of us reached that conclusion after discussing the mess our congressional and legislative governing systems have come to.
Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government “except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
I wonder if he would agree today, after taking a look at the U.S. Congress deadlocked by political divisiveness and mean-spirited partisan competition that stifle almost every effort to deal with challenges crying out for practical responses.
Instead of being free to work fulltime with their colleagues on the nitty-gritty work of crafting legislation, our representatives are slaves to a system that requires them to spend most of their time on electoral politics and fundraising.
Taxpayers pay them to be legislators. But keeping those jobs requires them to do something else altogether.
The time spent raising money and the obligations that come with begging money from people and organizations that want something takes more than just time away from the job. It drains away the independent judgment of the legislator.
So does the extreme loyalty to political parties, to the caucus and to the legislative leadership. The demands to stick together handicap the prospects for working on solutions that do not fit into the agenda of one of the political groups.
Efforts to maintain control lead to ugly games of gerrymandering and pandering to voting groups.
How could we find a system that frees our elective representatives from the servitude of full-time fundraising, from the draining of energy and spirit that go with permanent campaigns and from the tribal commitments to political caucuses and parties? How could we free them from these things so they could spend full time working on legislation to make our state and nation better?
Somebody asked, what about a lottery? Why not just select our representatives by lottery?
That suggestion sounded like a joke.
At first.
What could be more antithetical to democracy than putting aside citizen participation and simply choosing representatives by lot?
But, after I thought about it a minute, some advantages were apparent. No need to raise money. No permanent campaigns. No automatic partisan divides on every question. And, with modern computer techniques, a legislature that could be composed of people that would closely reflect the population, geographically, ethnically, gender, age and otherwise.
Of course, somebody said, you would have a whole bunch of people who would have no idea what they were doing. Then, somebody else said, neither do most newly elected legislators!
Still, making important selections by chance is just not the way we do things in America, is it?
One person quietly mentioned that we get our jury pools by random selection. The jury system is not perfect. But Americans have a pretty strong commitment to it. It works without the problems of partisan bickering and gamesmanship, fundraising or time-consuming political campaigns.
All this may be true, but selecting representatives by lottery would be an unprecedented violation of the democratic tradition that began in ancient Greece.
Or would it?
Actually, the selection of many major officers in Athens was by allotment or a random process. According to the “New World Encyclopedia,” “Election was seen as less democratic and open to corruption because it would favor the rich (who could buy votes) and the eloquent, whereas a lottery gave everyone an equal chance to participate and experience, in Aristotle’s words, ‘ruling and being ruled in turn.’ ”
So, am I ready to lead an effort to replace elections with a lottery selection process?
Not today.
But check with me after Nov. 6.
D.G. Martin hosts UNC-TV’s "North Carolina Bookwatch," which airs Fridays at 9:30 p.m. and Sundays at 5 p.m. For more information or to view prior programs, visit the webpage at www.unctv.org/ncbookwatch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)