Jackson is a city in distress. No doubt about it. But it has a mayor. And it has a city council. It also has an army of law enforcement officials and policy makers. The City of Jackson is the responsibility of those folks who are duly authorized by the charter of the City of Jackson to be responsible for it. The only folks who should be doing the business of Jackson in the capitol are the elected representatives of the Jackson Metro.
In 2003 the Barbour for Gov. campaign sent out a direct mail piece that said the deterioration of Jackson was the fault of Gov. Musgrove.
In 2007 the Eaves for Gov. campaign said that Gov. Barbour was responsible for the deterioration of Jackson. Harvard Charlie has a three page white paper on how to fix it and puts a line about Jackson tarnishing the state's image in his stump speech.
This is not a state issue. There's nothing in the Republican "limited and local government" argument that says there's room for this. There's nothing in the Democrat's "fiscal responsibility" argument that makes room for this. Using a state to manhandle a city isn't really anybody's policy directive. It's probably a bit unconstitutional. Being within the bounds of commonly accepted practice ( I pass on saying the law or the constitution being that I am neither a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar of any note), all they can do is increase the budgets of state agencies, and again, that gets dispersed across the state. Not so much of it would go to Jackson.
Given that it's not the state's responsibility and that there's nothing the state can do about it, we hear a lot about it. There are two reasons:
1. It's an easy press hit. Mayor Melton dominates news coverage in Jackson, for better or for worse. A statewide candidate saying something about crime is an easy ad on. "Mayor Melton said today, and Harvard Charlie said last week."
2. Rankin and Hinds counties are in big play. They've got lots of votes and are highly persuadable. I'd bet a plugged nickel that "crime" or "the safety of my family" are in the top 3 in every poll conducted in that area. Pandering.
The Eaves Campaign didn't say Barbour was responsible for the crime problem, they just pointed out that he has failed to act to oppose it.
ReplyDeleteTrue. Fair enough. Post edited to reflect reality.
ReplyDeleteBig play? Primary or general or both or what?
ReplyDeleteReason I ask is because in statewide general elections, State or Federal, the electoral clout of Hinds County has been effectively neutered by the Rankin/Madison combo.
I agree that using "crime" in state campaigns is usually pandering.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I disagree with the statement that the only folks who should be "doing the business" of Jackson are its elected officials. It is our capitol and our largest city, and we all share in its benefits and its distresses - and we should all share in its solutions.
For example, for Mississippi to progress, all children must have equal access to adequate education. Education funding comes predominantly from local revenues, and some counties have larger per capita revenues than others. Thus, the state can play a role by making up for these differences.
Look at the progressive states, and you will always see State support for their cities.
JTown,
ReplyDeleteBelieve it or not, both Hinds and Rankin counties are highly persuadable. My numbers indicate over 36% in either county, and I'm using '03 which was a great year for Republicans. Madison County is barely below the marker for being in play.
A lot of those folks are voters who split tickets. They vote for the guy who wins, regardless of the party.
When I first did these, I was shocked at the places where Dems were going to have to play, and in turn the unexpected places where Reps are going to have to play. Desoto Co. comes up on my Dem list. Forrest and Lamar both come up on the Rep. list. If you do the numbers, the traditional wisdom really isn't wisdom at all. It's perception fooling reality. Great county committees can wire that county, but the best ones can't break 50 without good candidates. At least that's the way I imagine the Rankin county situation.
Part of this is also demographic. Places with big populations, like Rankin, Hinds, Desoto, Forrest, and Lee are less homogenous from a race, age, and income perspective. That exponentially changes the likelihood that people will be persuadable voters.
I know that the Republicans at the state level think that they've got this election on a wire- running the table from Coroner to Governor state wide. But, again if you look at the '03 results, about 41% of the state is persuadable and the Dems have a 10% performance advantage.
All that means is that the guy who runs the best campaign wins about 70% of the time. Party is not nearly as influential as we would be led to believe. Thus the "This is how we do it" posts when we first launched.
Hope that answers any questions you might have.
-M. Arnold