Boswell-Loftin picked as Johnny Ellis' replacement on County Board
Kurt Allemeier reports in the Dispatch/Argus,
Lauren Boswell-Loftin of Rock Island was sworn in Tuesday night as the newest Rock Island County board member.It seems like only yesterday that young Sen. Jacobs was thundering from the pulpit at Johnny Ellis' funeral that, by God, he was going to work as hard as he could to make sure Anita Ellis was appointed to succeed her husband. It was a line guaranteed to get rousing approval from those in attendance, and naturally, it did.
She fills a vacancy in District 19 seat left by the death last month of longtime board member Johnny Ellis, of Rock Island. Mr. Ellis, who'd been on the board since 1996, died of Hodgkin's disease.
His dying wish was for his wife, Anita, to be appointed to his seat. The selection of Ms. Boswell-Loftin was "unfortunate," Mrs. Ellis said. "My husband did a lot for the community. (He) brought a medical clinic here with my help and my support."
Rock Island County Board chairman Jim Bohnsack interviewed Ms. Boswell-Loftin, Mrs. Ellis and Glen Evans, also of Rock Island, for the position.
"I really appreciate the confidence (Rock Island County Board members) have in me," said Ms. Boswell-Loftin, who lost to Mr. Ellis by 10 votes in the March 2004 primary. "I ran for office because I wanted to help the community."
Mr. Bohnsack said he chose Ms. Boswell-Loftin to fill the vacant seat because he received overwhelming letters of support for her from a few unions and other people in the community. Rock Island County Democratic Party chairman John Gianulis recommended Ms. Boswell-Loftin for the position, Mr. Bohnsack said.
Since the term ends Nov. 30, 2006, all three have filed petitions to run in the March 2006 primary, Mr. Bohnsack said.
"The only thing I can do is run a campaign and debate on the issues," Mrs. Ellis said. "The voters of the community will have the last say."
"I plan to work for the votes," Ms. Boswell-Loftin said.
Ms. Boswell-Loftin is also president of the Rock Island County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
Mr. Evans lost to incumbent Terry M.A. Brooks for Rock Island's 1st Ward seat in the April 2005 general election.
R.I. Alderman Terry Brooks also pledged to work for her appointment, addressing his comments at the time to the County Chair, "Mr. Bohnsack, if Anita isn't in that seat, you're going to hear from all of us in this room," he said. "Anita is going to fill that seat."
Some commenters have left the impression that Sen. Jacobs is all-powerful, but apparently he either didn't follow through on his crowd pleasing pledge or at least he and Ald. Brooks failed to persuade County Democratic Chair John Gianulis. What happened?
posted by The Inside Dope @ 11/16/2005
14 comments
14 Comments:
The woman that was appointed WAS African American!!!
Duh!
Anon... first, YRID didn't say or imply that the new appointee wasn't African-American. YRID simply said that local Dems need to do a better job of integrating African-Americans into the party. Appointing an African-American woman to succeed another African-American doesn't mean the party has done enough, does it? Read comments carefully before responding.
Also, please select "other" and pick a user name when leaving comments. Thanks.
maybesomeday - how is everything mike jacobs does now a giant blunder? he made a mistake on his comparison re: his work on the river boat gambling situation but that doesn't make everything he does monumental! everything a mistake? very itneresting. nice report on a comment made at a funeral dope. are you saying that senator jacobs and alderman terry brooks didn't work hard enough to get her appointed? just curious.
Young Dem, this blog hasn't turned into anything of the sort. Your perception is a bit skewed I believe. I've not posted anything that wasn't fact. If any other politician had done the same things Jacobs has, they'd get the exact same coverage.
I'd also point out that only a small fraction of posts here have anything remotely to do with Jacobs, so your assertion is hard to square with reality.
Diehard... it's pretty reckless to suggest that a presumably life-long Democrat running in a Democratic primary is a Republican.
Do you have any evidence to back that up?
Most of your assumptions seem to be a reach.
They also highlight an interesting debate.
It's clear that those who have been active in the party view Rumler or any other candidate who hasn't put in years of laboring in obscurity with obvious distain and resentment.
This begs the question, should a candidate be required to put in years of drudgery in service to the local party in order to be considered legit?
Is the party really like major league baseball where you have to spend years working your way through the system before you can play in the big leagues? Should it be?
Obviously, a party organization depends on those who are committed enough to devote many long hours of their valuable time as well as donate money to the cause, and those who do so deserve to be commended and rewarded whenever possible.
But the fact is, there are many people who've worked diligently for and donated to the party for years, sometimes decades, who haven't gotten a thing for their long efforts other than a few plates of shaved ham and baked beans. There's plenty of resentment out there by people who feel used and ignored by the organization while the handful of big-foots play their games.
It remains that a very small handful of people call the shots locally, and everyone who wants to work within that system is forced to kiss their, er, ring.
But is this quasi-Mafia style system really the way it has to be?
Should someone who chose not to be a part of it be castigated and dismissed?
This is an interesting and important debate to have. It may warrent a post of it's own.
Ooops! These comments got out of order... my reply above should be ahead of Diehard's reply. Sorry for the mix up.
And in reply to Diehard's last comment, I'd say that I certainly can understand the valid concern with Rumler's lack of experience, as well as his lack of familiarity with the local organization.
Those are both legitimate concerns and reasons for skepticism.
skippy spake thusly: 'nice report on a comment made at a funeral dope. are you saying that senator jacobs and alderman terry brooks didn't work hard enough to get her appointed? just curious.'
The facts are:
- Sen. Mike pledged to work as hard as he could to ensure that Mrs. Ellis was appointed to succeed her husband. Mr. Brooks warned the County Chair that he'd have to answer to everyone there if he didn't appoint her.
- She was not appointed.
That's all that was stated. Draw your own conclusions.
Did Jacobs work as hard as he could? Only Sen. Mike knows.
One could say that the fact that he failed to accomplish what he pledged to accomplish is evidence he didn't work hard enough simply by definition.
There are only two possible conclusions which can be drawn.
A. That Jacobs didn't have enough influence to get Mrs. Ellis appointed.
and/or
B. He didn't work as hard as he had pledged to Ellis' widow he would.
Was getting Gianulis and Bohnsack to appoint Mrs. Ellis impossible no matter how hard Jacobs worked at it?
Possibly. All we know is that they didn't heed Sen. Jacobs stated wishes.
Again, I supplied the facts as they're known. In the end, it doesn't matter what I think, it's your job to draw your own conclusions.
I appreciate the Dope bringing up the debate about party organizations and candidates relation to them.
Party organizations are usually flawed, but that does not diminish their value to voters in elections. For any reader who believes in progressive causes, you should understand that the party we have is better than no party at all, and having individual candidates responsible for entire campaigns. There are simply matters that qualified legislators may not know about the political process, and the institutional memory of a party committee is essential to success.
That said, Democratic party organizations should not be run as a "quasi-mafia" family, and there should be open an honest debate within party members and democratic voters. In practice, there is a viscious cycle perpetuating itself. Voters do not take precinct committeemen races seriously becuase they aren't responsive. In turn, party committees are not responsive because often they know voters don't care enough about what the committee does do to be bothered by it.
Voters and officials are both to blame, but the longer the cycle continues, the worse the problem becomes.
The solution is participation by voters without immediate rewards. You can't always turn things around with one election. Politics is a long and neverending road that needs to be built and maintained. Voters need to realize that if the powerful keep on winning when you put up a good fight, it is not a reason to give up and let them win without a fight.
For people who lament the status quo, potshots do not effect change. Organize. Make your argument. You may still lose, but one time you might nor.
I support the Rock Island County Democratic Party as an ideal, but at the same time I do my best to make my voice heard when there is a problem, at least when I am in a position to do so.
As for candidates for office not participating in the local party whatsoever, I think it is a serious problem. The party does a lot of work, and deserve to some extent to have the ability to help those who help them. If Mr. Reumler (sp?) runs, that is his right, and if he manages to win the majority of voters over, that is his kudos, but the party or its supporters has no obligation to support a candidate if they feel he or she is not a member of the local Democratic community. Mr. Reumler's Democratic credentials are immpressive (conservative Democratic bosses, perhaps, but certainly not Republicans) but I think party regulars and voters themselves want, and deserve, a bit of a local candidate as well. So I certainly do not support someone who has spent so much time away and does not know what it is like to live where they are running.
That is not to say that only hometown folks can run for office. People move around in the United States, but wherever one moves, I think they have an obligation to participate in the local party and work in the local community before aspiring to any office.
Well, I have certainly spent at least my two cents, and probably much more like a dime, instead, so I'll go. Thanks Dope for the topic.
Local Dem, the juvenile misspellings of opponent's names is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what these folks' think is clever. Trust me. I've seen more mature behavior from 3 yr olds with diaper rash.
Just feel fortunate that you're spared the endless string of goofiness from these people which doesn't make it to the blog.
They're simply not capable of figuring out that they don't have a right to post garbage here, and evidently have absolutely nothing serious to contribute whatsoever. It's disgusting, sad, and alarming when you realize this is all they have to offer.
I'm disappointed by the response to my legitamate misspelling of Mr. Rumler's name. I'm not in the Quad Cities at the moment, I have only seen his name once, and I wasn't looking at the particular blog post with his name in it at the time. I apologize for the mistake, and I even acknowledged that it might be wrong in my original post.
I'm here trying to elevate the debate, not to throw stones. It's a legitimate position to believe that someone who has been physically away from a particular disctrict should take time to liv ehere and be here in order to understand the current situation before trying to jump into a particular political position.
I admire Mr. Rumler for his drive and determination, his participation in Democratic politics (another thing the detractors seem to have ignored in my post was my respect for his credentials), and his exercise in his right to run. I am not bad-mouthing him in any way. My complaint is a practical matter, so rather than simply disregard my comments because I happened to spell someone's name worng, perhaps you could try convincing me that Mr. Rumler does in fact know the situation in the Senate District.
Highxlr8r,
I appologize for leaving the wrong impression.
I wasn't referring to your comments when I mentioned people misspelling their opponents name and otherwise engaging in boorish behavior here.
As a matter of fact, I hadn't even noticed that you'd misspelled Rumler's name, and so thought that LocalDem above was referring to a person or persons who regularly grace these pages and whose idea of a fun time is purposely misspelling opponent's names and otherwise spreading all manner of garbage around.
I assure you that I was not directing my criticism at you.
Rather, I've been meaning to welcome you to The Inside Dope and commend you for your very thoughtful comments.
Your comment re: the party "machine" vs. new blood was interesting and welcome. I hope others might follow your lead.
Again, no criticism was intended towards your honest mistake, but rather those who purposely and continually misspell people's names as a childish sign of disrespect.
Sorry for the misundertanding. I welcome your contributions.
Perhaps a group hug is in order!
Let me take a shower first, OK? You'll thank me later.
How this became about Rumler I don't know - what I do wonder about is if Rumler is related to Mike Jacobs somehow??? By some relation somehow?
That's the rumor I heard recently.......makes you wonder doesn't it? Is Rumler doing Mike a favor running to intentionally get his butt kicked? What is the payoff to Rumler????
Post a Comment
<< Home