A vote for the kid

lewleadbeater.com

notes from the edge

Home

Email Me

				THE
Column Archive				VIRGINIA GAZETTE
				WILLIAMSBURG, VIRGINIA
A vote for the kid				April 26, 2006

If I lived in Williamsburg and were able to vote on May 2, I’d vote for the kid.

On the other hand, if I did live in Williamsburg, my application to register and vote would probably wind up in David Andrews’ rejection pile, since I have no idea what the difference is between a domicile, an abode and a residence. In addition, I do take trips, and I have been known to visit friends or relatives for several weeks at a time, so I suppose that I would incur the wrath of Judge Powell because I’m not ensconced in my domicile-abode-residence 365 days of the year.

But if I overcame all that and was able to go to the polls, I’d vote for the kid.

It’s not that I have anything against Jeanne Zeidler or Billy Scruggs, but let’s face it. They’ve thrown enough strikes to make an impression, and now it’s time for them to go to the dugout and take up a new sport. I’m very suspicious of people who think the ultimate bling-bling is to reveal an embarrassingly comedic cupidity for spending their lives in the political nowhere that is Williamsburg’s City Council and discussing desiccated Comp Plans and vinyl siding.

In fact, I’m suspicious of anyone who wants to serve more than one term in any political office. Get in, get out, and make room for some new blood and a few new uncorrupted ideas.

I’d bet anything that Sandra Day O’Connor, if she could negotiate Andrews’ roadblocks and Powell’s crankiness, would vote for the kid too. If her recent chancelloric investiture speech and her op-ed piece in the Washington Post are any indication, Justice O’Connor is all for getting kids into politics.

Lamenting the fact that civics courses seem to have gone kaput in school systems bludgeoned by required proficiencies in reading and math, O’Connor decries the results of studies that indicate that only 9% of 12^th graders could list ways in which a democracy benefits from citizen participation. “We need more and better classes to promote the knowledge of government, history, law and current events that students need to understand and participate in democracy,” said O’Connor.

The operative word here is “participate,” by which O’Connor means an intrepid willingness to get involved in public service, and, yes, to bring new intellectual viands to the electoral table. Let the young run for office, and let us not rebuke them on the basis of inexperience and ageism.

O’Connor’s concerns are reminiscent of the earlier successes of the recently-deceased William Sloane Coffin, who, unlike anyone else in recent history, galvanized the youth of this nation to hitherto unknown participatory heights in the 60’s and 70’s. As noted in his obituary in the New York Times, Coffin, who was at the time serving as the chaplain at Yale University, “sought to inspire and encourage an idealistic and rebellious generation of college students in the 1960s.”

And so he did. As a result of student marches and student opposition to a war grounded in deception and lies, Lyndon Johnson declined to run for a second term and Richard Nixon was forced to halt the carnage in Vietnam.

To those of Coffin’s protégés who had the guts to participate, to run for office and, in some cases, to die for their civil disobedience we owe much.

While registrar Andrews could make a good case of not allowing Coffin to vote on May 2, I suspect that the good chaplain, were he alive, would tell the kid to go for it.

While obviously not a rabid radical, the kid is possessed of an idealism that is refreshing in these days of maniacal growth and political skepticism. As a member of the Sierra Student Coalition and the Student Environmental Action Committee, he might be concerned enough about land conservancy and environmental positivism to prove a worthy opponent for the meadow munchers and tree whackers who seem to run our local world these days.

As a result of his active participation in the Hunger Awareness Taskforce, his priorities might well dictate that consideration of the insistent increase of hunger and homelessness in the city should now take precedence over the lunacy inherent in endless discussions about the hagiography of HardiePlank or an acceptable length for grass.

The kid also seems to be well aware of the fact that Williamsburg no longer exists in a safety bubble, severed from and independent of the counties that surround it. The growth and economies of York and James City Counties are acutely associated with the viability of Williamsburg. The city must, he says, address issues of growth and livelihood in tandem with its neighbors in the counties.

What impresses me most about the kid is his willingness to come out from behind the protective walls that encircle the college and defend his ideas and concerns in public debates with those who supposedly know a lot more about political shenanigans than he does. For someone who is deeply into degree acquisition and who works as a waiter to boot, this takes colossal guts.

As I understand it, the registrar is going to allow the kid to vote for himself, and that’s a good thing. If I had my domicile-abode-residence in Williamsburg, and if I had a valid Virginia DMV registration card, I too would cast my lot with O’Connor and Coffin and vote for the gutsy guy, the kid, David Sievers.