All Politics Is Not Local: The Nationalization of Local Politics and the Decline of True Representation, Part 1

Tip O’Neill once uttered the phrase “all politics is local,” meaning that what concerns people the most when voting for representatives and leaders are, generally, local issues. How is politician X going to represent my district? What will candidate Y to about the district’s sky-rocketing property tax? Will politician Z help to create jobs in our community? These were some concerns that used to hold sway over how voters chose their representatives. People cared deeply about the fate of their communities and politicians and candidates for local office knew this and campaigned on local issues.

Things have changed. Now the political landscape is so polarized that local issues to don’t even matter anymore. It’s not so much the people that are caught up in a ridiculous partisan struggle for the heart of American politics. (I do, however, know plenty of people that are partisan voters and will vote for one party and hold the opinion that the party they support is as infallible as the pope.) Politicians, those who are in office and those are running for office, are to blame for the nationalization of local politics. They are the ones that are speaking to issues that, though they are important, are not at the center of what is best for each district.

The first culprit I will examine is Democrat Bob Roggio who is running against Representative Jim Gerlach in Pennsylvania’s Sixth District. Roggio, a political lightweight and newcomer, has been running one of the most incompetent, un-intelligent, deceitful campaigns in the Delaware Valley. Roggio, like many of his ilk, is waging his campaign against George W. Bush and not his actual opponent. The failed presidency of Bush has given Roggio the luxury of running against Gerlach by tying him to W.’s disastrous presidency. Like many other Democrats, Roggio is not being forced to stand for anything too particular, which is evidenced by his simplistic policy proposals that just mirror general Democratic talking points. Strike that. His policy proposals are merely dumbed-down version of usual Democratic policies.

Roggio, on his website, does not speak to issues that matter to the people of Pennsylvania’s Sixth district. He has resorted to the bankrupt and overplayed tactic of connecting the president’s name to his opponents name via the /.

Here’s some examples from Roggio’s website: He claimed that once he is in office he will vote “for tax cuts for middle class families and by repealing the Bush/Gerlach tax breaks for people making over $250,000 a year.” (I know this statement is very deceitful and displays a simplistic political mind, but I am not going to deal with the substance of this statement in this post.) On fixing the banking crisis: “Under the failed policies of George Bush and Jim Gerlach, the financial markets have gone without enforced regulations at the expense of the American taxpayer.” (Once again, the substance displays a lacking of understanding the economy, but that is not my focus here.) Again on taxes: "Bush and Gerlach have consistently provided tax cuts for millionaires..."

By running for a local office using national issues, Roggio is denying his constituency, if elected, of someone who cares for and will fight for his district. I’m sure that crying wolf…sorry…crying Bush will rally the support of many die hard Democrats and disillusioned Republicans, but it does nothing to rational independent voters who care deeply for their communities. By running against Bush (which is a disease that plagues the entire Democratic Party) Roggio is, in effect, insulting the voters of his district. He is sending the message to them that their concerns are not important enough for him to place them at the center of his policy proposals. With any luck and some wishful thinking the voters of this district will wake up and repudiate this type of politics and send Roggio back to his rather large home.

In the next post on this topic I will take a look at John Adler.