We will start this week of March Madness (and NIT Noodling), with a little Separated at Birth:
Nebraska State Treasurer Shane Osborn had an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal on Saturday, Nebraska Sets the Standard on Government Accountability.
One, as Osborn puts it, “As an elected official, the least we can do is give the taxpayers a receipt for the money we took from them.” Two, it only cost $38,000 to put it together. Gauge that number against other states that have spent $500,000 to $1,000,000 on similar sites.
Now here’s an interesting follow up on this. Nebraska State Senator Tom White — who is constantly pimping his campaign website JoinTomWhite.com, introduced LB16, in order to force a website similar to the Nebraska State Treasurer’s.
White contends that his bill adds in items (like tax-credits for businesses) that Osborn’s doesn’t have. However, White’s bill doesn’t cover nearly the amount of different information that the State Treasurer’s site already has.
Now that’s not to say that the site can’t be improved. And it probably isn’t a horrible idea to have a legislative mandate to have such a site. But shouldn’t it at least recoginize that there already IS such a site, and that you just want to make it better. Hmm, how to do that?
Well if White’s proposal is almost exactly the same as the website that is already up, certainly he must have conferred with Osborn and his staff to discuss what Osborn could use to make it a better site. Or to see how the bill could be drafted to make it better for Nebraskans. Or to, just see what’s up with the plan and where it’s going.
Ya mean White is just grandstanding to try to position himself for the next office to run for? Oh. Got it.
We chuckled at the OWH reporter Robynn Tysver’s story the other day about Jim Vokal’s campaign strategy. The headline of the story was, “Voters to assess Vokal advertising strategy“. Really? That’s what voters do?
“I really like that Hal Daub fella, and think he would be the best to lead the city…but darn it, I just don’t care for his ad strategy. So Randy Brown it is.”
We coulda swore that voters look at a candidate’s positions on the issues and make a judgment about what’s best for the city. Now we are to understand that voters are all about when the candidate went on the air and looked at how much they spent.
Yeah, yeah, we get the analysis. But here’s the thing. The headline (at least) is extremely poor if this is supposed to be a “news” story. The fact that the OWH doesn’t have a full-time political columnist makes this kind of story necessary — if they want to discuss it. But it comes across a bit ham-fisted when the OWH reporter writes, “Vokal’s financial disadvantage doesn’t mean it’s over…“
Doesn’t mean it’s over?? The candidate is already running his third ad and can argue that he is in a better spot than his other city-councilman rival, Jim Suttle (as the CW is that Hal Daub is in the Primary lead). If you make it all the way to the end of the story, you’ll see Doug Parrot provide that spin. (Man, Parrott is so in the bag for Vokal…).
But before that, you have to endure the Democrat line of “He (Vokal) rolled the dice and came up short.” Well, that’s an interesting post-election analysis. But three weeks out, it’s just a little pre-mature.
This makes for a nice column. News story? Not so much.
There have been a number of comments on the boards the last few days about Lee Terry staff or whatnot lunching with
Jim Vokal a city council candidate’s staff and this and that about Who Supports Whom. (Note correction. -SS)
Well, we’ve gotten it from one of the highest sources in Terry Corp. that Rep. Terry supports all the Republican candidates, and does not and will not be showing favoritism to any one candidate. While individuals can certainly do so — and they all certainly will when they vote — Congressman Terry is staying very much neutral among the Republicans up for office.
So there ya go.