Waiting for Lee Fisher to Take a Controversial Stand? He. Just. Did.
Submitted by Anthony Fossaceca on Wed, 10/28/2009 - 9:43pm.
Those of you waiting on Lee Fisher to come out and take a meaningful stance on a hot issue finally have your wish. According to a Plain Dealer article this evening, Fisher endorsed the controversial Issue 6 proposal this afternoon, apparently by way of an endorsement statement. OhioDaily had not received the statement at the time of this posting.
From Fisher :
"I am deeply disappointed that unfair speculation about the motives behind both Issues 5 and 6 have polarized this important effort and unnecessarily divided well-intentioned neighborhood, religious, business, labor and political leaders--the very people who must come together and forge a consensus for reform to be successful,"
The endorsement puts Fisher at odds with the local labor leadership and the majority of elected Democrats in Cuyahoga County. North Shore AFL-CIO Executive Director Harriet Applegate responded by calling out Fisher's endorsement as a flip-flop :
"After telling a number of people that he was against Issue 6, Lt. Governor Fisher has now decided he is for it,"
"It remains to be seen if that will change again, but what is important in his statement is his belief that it is essential for people across our county to come together if we are truly going to achieve meaningful reform."
Fisher's decision to jump into this mess is completely and totally unexpected. It's an issue that he could have easily avoided, and no one would have blamed him for doing so. By endorsing Issue 6, he instantly ruffles feathers of party leaders who were already privately debating ways to punish County Prosecutor Bill Mason, Parma Heights Mayor Martin Zanotti, State Senator Dale Miller, Cleveland Councilman Joe Cimperman and others who have decided to openly back (or create) Issue 6.
Is there political upside here for Fisher? Not sure. We may know more about that after the polls close Tuesday night. It's quite possible this risky show of decisiveness has some root in polling taking place in the county in the final days. It may also be a preemptive "flu-shot," inoculating Fisher from the almost certain attempts of Republicans to link any and all Cuyahoga Democrats to the corrupt officials being indicted on a regular basis. One thing is certain, lots of people are going to remember this decision - whether they like it or not - as May 2010 approaches. Let's see which camp has the longer memory.
Unfortunately, it's the wrong kind of controversy
This isn't about taking a courageous stand that benefits regular people. It's about standing with big-business, big-money power. He just proved what many of us suspected: that Lee Fisher always takes the side of the big, powerful interests against those of the little average guy.
I've gotten deep into the weeds of studying Issue 6 and I'm deeply disappointed at how many smart, well-meaning people have fallen for its two big lies: that we've talked enough about county reform (it's never really been given a public hearing in Cuyahoga at all) and now need to do something — anything — and that this proposal addresses corruption. What really floored me was spending some time comparing it to the Summit County reform process which was all about building concensus and making sure opposition was minimal by inclusion of all stakeholders.
In contrast, Issues 5 and 6 are a clash for power and control. That's no recipe for forming a new type of government, and it's an anti-recipe for "reform." It's pitting people against each other and frankly, the only way to not have this end in catastrophe for the county is for both sides to agree to shelve reform for now until all parties come to the table together — as they did in Summit.
It's especially offensive to me the way the Plain Dealer has ramped up the anger and disgust at "corruption" which they have implied affects the entire Democratic party — a bald-faced lie. They want to make it impossible for any Democrat to not grovel to the big-business forces trying to purchase our county government outright.
And seriously — you don't think the Issue 6 leaders are also already looking to punish the Issue 5 people if their issue passes? In a sense, they already did that by excluding them from the discussion until the big decisions were made – and eliminating their offices. You don't see that protecting the office of the ONLY county elected official who not only was involved in creating the proposal but was one of the people who initiated it — thereby eliminating all potential competitors to his political "turf" — is corruption almost by definition?
The only way I can see Issue 6 not creating chaos, deadlock and way more corruption than we have now is if A. the businesses that poured enormous donations into passing this issue promise to sit on the sidelines while the county executive is chosen and B. Bill Mason declines to run for prosecutor again. I don't see those things happening.
As for Lee Fisher, he's just added another obstacle in his path of beating Rob Portman. Supporting Issue 6 will dampen his support in Northeast Ohio in the black community and among Democratic rank and file. if Issue 6 passes, and the process of forming the new government is as conflict-ridden as seems likely, his chances will get even dimmer.
Here's hoping both issues get voted down, and we study the Summit County process and bring ALL stakeholders to the table.
This may be the piece too far where I can't forgive Lee and can't vote for him if he is the nominee — not something I would have said yesterday. My trust in him has been waning since back in the winter when — believe it or not — I was totally neutral. Now I'd have to say it's completely gone.
Also, if those quotes you report are true, he sounds like the ultimate weasel. OK, maybe not the ultimate. No one will ever top Joe Lie-berman. Very sad.
You know, I just re-read your post
because I was so shocked and taken aback – and it sounds sort of like Fisher's support for Issue 6 is merely speculative. I think I will give him the benefit of the doubt for now, and hope he actually does understand that trying to do county reform on the backs of two warring factions is hopelessly tainted before it even starts. I really do not want to be in a place of saying I can't vote for him if he is our nominee. Let's assume he has more sense than this, until we confirm that's not true.