Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Apr
19
When your child attends a Jewish day school, you’re required to find creative child engagement arrangements during many days that your children in public school do not have off, but your child in the religious school does. Today, being the seventh day of Passover, is such a day and, without sitter coverage or playdates, and with trips to the bookstore, library, playground and every shelf in the house with crafts on it already arranged for or used up, in order to attend today’s Meet the Bloggers with Richard Cordray, I had to resort to something that, for eight years while I worked at Bellefaire JCB, was routine: taking my child to work with me.
My favorite memories of doing this concern the months during which I helped negotiate the CCDCFS contract for the 44 or 45 private, non-profit children mental health agencies that comprised the Alliance for Child Caring Service Providers. I’d meet with the Alliance’s contract committee, headed by Dave Lundeen of Cleveland Christian Home. I’d meet with Paula Atwood, my partner in crime for the Alliance. I’d meet, with Paula, with Rita Carey and Bob Sha-something – I can’t remember his name at the moment. (This was all pre- Jim McCafferty being the head, but he was at CCDCFS and I worked with him on a few cases over the years.) We had a lot of meetings, and it was a very, very, very difficult responsibility. A topdog bulldog lawyer had been doing the negotiating for a few years and DCFS thought that when the tactic switched to using me, well, they’d have it easy.
Except, I was not only a full-fledged lawyer. I was also a social worker. So I could literally speak to pretty much all sides of any issue in the contract. And did.
During the hundreds of hours we spent together, I’d frequently need to bring my then three year old son with me. I’d roll up a car mat (which, if you don’t know, is a mat that has a city with buildings and roads on it, and the child can chooge the cars in and out of hospitals, firehouses, schools, parking lots and so on, or even fill up the entire parking lot with Hot Wheels cars), and bring a plastic case of cars, some workbooks, regular books, books that made sounds, and lots of Goldfish and juiceboxes, with me. Mommy’s bag of tricks. Big, heavy canvas bag of tricks, plus the diaper bag, plus the briefcase, plus the pocketbook, plus the winter coats and outergear accessories
The contract negotiators didn’t blink – I mean, we all worked at child care agencies, private or public. How hypocritical would that be, to disallow a working mom a chance to work and bring her very mindful child with her?
Of course, my son was excellent too – he traveled well and never complained. He played in pretty much every office I ever occupied and with many, many, many a co-worker.
Then, just before I gave birth to my third and last child, I stopped working outside the home. And since that time, I’ve brought my kids with me to meetings or interviews on only a few occasions. Interestingly, in at least two of those, at places where you’d have thought the staff would be kid-friendly, my editor actually received complaints, after the staff had originally said it was no problem to bring the kids. Whatever. Probably part of why I’m leary of PR people – they don’t like a writer bringing her kids, even to a venue that is about kids.
And so, today, my youngest accompanied me to Franklin County Treasurer Richard Cordray’s Meet the Bloggers session (on behalf of his race to become Ohio State Treasurer).
Full disclosure: I bribed him (my son, not Cordray), but good. First, I deprived him of Gameboy use all day (I’m mean, but honestly? This is so not a problem for me to do. Those gadgets are anima and animus wrapped into one). Then, that got him ready to use it when we arrived. And, with just two bathroom breaks, the second one he wanted to take alone but I wouldn’t let him, he was awesome – no surprise.
As for Cordray, well, look. I have to confess, there’s not one stinker, ODP or not ODP endorsed, on the state-wide ballot. Some may have better qualifications than their same-side opponents, some maybe haven’t done what they should have or should be but hopefully will between now and November in terms of making nice, some recognize the role they’re playing as a party endorsed person and will hopefully make the most of whatever boost they get from that. I’m not naming names. Just not important enough and frankly, the amount of time that this MTB session consumed with chat about party politics and statewide politics and anything other than the Treasurer’s office surprised me, particularly in comparison to how little that’s happened in every other MTB session I’ve attended.
All that aside, and included, I left this session feeling that Cordray is a very good candidate for this office. The guy has higher ambitions in public service. The guy is young. The guy looks, sounds and behaves with mannerisms akin to Chris Redfern. The guy was endorsed by the ODP over Hugh Quill, whom the MSM and others tagged as a treasurer’s treasurer (and Cordray admirably and adequately neutralized by demonstrating his intelligence, sharpness and breadth of knowledge and abilities).
Of course, being tall and slight and blonde and under 42 (Cordray, I believe, is 38 and Redfern, I believe, is 41 – remember? He corrected me when I said we were about the same age and that I’m 43?) didn’t hurt Cordray’s Redfern clone-like presentation.
And just to be crystal: I’m not saying this is a bad thing, the clone-like presenatation. It’s just an observation. Just an observation. I observe, and I often write down my observations here. This is an observation – not negative, not positive. Choose that for yourself.
On the issues, he’s got it all. Cordray has an excellent handle on how to translate his successes and efforts in Franklin county (he’s in his second term there as treasurer) to the state office. He connected the dots from the state treasurer’s office to the Noe Coingate scandal. He’s a lawyer and a numbers guy. I trust him when he says he’ll be aggressively against bad practices and aggressive in instilling good or at least better ones.
I’m particularly thrilled to think that he’ll graft his Kid’s Corner section of his Franklin County website to the state’s site, a woefully rigid and stilted thing right now.
Could I say more? I could always say more. Listen to the podcast when it goes up and decide for yourself.
Bottom line: he’s looking to continue, extend and ascend his career in politics. I suspect he has an excellent chance at doing so and probably deserves that chance. Do I like the idea of career politicians? Only if they show me that they’ve made the right career choice, via their success in that career – through my eyes as a voter.
Let’s hope he won’t disappoint. Based on his record and presentation, there’s no reason right now to think that he will.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:35 pm April 19th, 2006 in Politics
Comments
7 Responses to “Richard Cordray Meets the Bloggers”
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
Maybe it’s not appropriate for me to do this myself, but I loved the fact that you brought your son along and he gave me ALL the respect I deserved and yet not any more, and with perfect manners all the while.
I won’t let you down.
Rich – As long as it’s you saying it’s you, of course you can comment (imposters could too, theoretically, but hopefully you have somewhat who might catch it; don’t know if you know, but I was getting impersonated on a conservative blog briefly, very annoying).
Since you posted a comment here, if you get back to this post, I do have another question (no surprise): If you don’t mind my asking, were you nervous with MTB yesterday? I thought maybe you were, but then I also thought you seemed tired too – a lethal combination when faced with five bloggers, I’m sure.
You know, we post a lot about our MTB interviews, our opinions of how it went. But I’d actually love to hear from the candidates to find out how they view the experience. I know you said some very nice things at the end about the value of what George, Tim and Bill et al have set up and are pursuing. But as the person in the hotseat, how was it?
It was just fine — the questions were sharp, and the questioners cared about the answers, which is all a candidate can ask.
I am, of course, tired all the time these days, which sometimes takes the edge off, but that is not always a bad thing. But no, I don’t get nervous about these things anymore, once I am comfortable that I can answer almost all the legitimate questions (and for the ones for which I don’t know the answer, as Mark Twain once said, “I was gratified to be able to answer promptly and correctly, so I said ‘I don’t know’”).
Jill, one question you asked as part of a compound, which I realized that I never answered, was “How are you managing to raise so much money?” The answer, as best I can discern, comes in several parts.
First, when I first got elected as a State Rep in 1990, it was with a largely grass-roots campaign. When I ran for Congress in 1992, I took the same approach and it did not work — the districts are at least five times larger, so it is more of a media campaign, and my strong opponent raised more money and beat me in the last week on TV. So I learned from that, and when I ran for AG in 1998, against a very tough incumbent, we focused on fundraising and through dint of steady effort, over the course of that campaign I raised over $1 million, even though it was an uphill battle all the way against Betty Montgomery, who has proved to be a very popular official over the years. She clobbered me, but again if you lose an election and are not discouraged into quitting, but have kept your eyes and ears open, you should come back better the next time.
This year, I am bringing that same effort to the race, but finding something new — a very different dynamic where people believe the Dems have a great opportunity, and that in this race in particular I have a strong chance to win. So all my effort is finding a much more receptive audience. Also, I have what I consider to be a very presentable record as a Treasurer, carrying out duties much the same as those in the state office, which has given me added credibility this time around.
We will continue to put in that consistent effort, and my sense is that fundraising develops its own momentum — if you are doing well, and begin to look like a winner, people want to help you because they want to be part of that. Or so we are hoping in my campaign.
FEEL FREE TO CONTRIBUTE AT OUR WEBSITE, http://www.cordraycommittee.com!
That’s another overlong answer from me — just like during MTB.
Richard
Rich –
Thank you for the thorough response. There really is no such thing as an overlong answer, if the elements contribute to understanding it. As an interviewer, it’s the repetition of generalities in overlong responses that drives me nuts.
What occured to me as I read your response was, I wonder what his opinion is on public financing of political campaigns. My guess is that you’re not necessarily in favor of them, since you’ve very carefully mined donors by using your record, brains and snowballing connections. That sounds legit enough to me – but I know very little about the campaign finance laws.
Still, as both someone interested in fiscal responsibility – as a general concept, as well as getting elected to a political office and possibly running against candidates with even greater abilities at raising money than yourself, especially as you seek more prominent offices, what is your opinion on public financing of political campaigns, a la Vermont?
Actually, I am a strong proponent of the Clean Elections program that is being pushed here in Ohio especially by the Blue 88 group, as has been enacted in Maine and Arizona, with perhaps some tweaking.
Yes I am doing very well so far at raising money in my current race, but there is no question the public interest would be better served by a system in which candidates were put on a level at a decent amount of funding, for two reasons: (1) they could spend more time campaigning among voters and less time campaigning among donors; (2) it also would mean that the true cost of financing elections, which now too often shows up in skewed public policy, tax loopholes, and other private giveaways at the expense of the public, would no longer be a basis for distorting public policy.
In my view, this also would be a fairer system for Democrats to compete, as we tend to be at a systematic disadvantage, usually, for sources of raising funds.
As a state official, I have already pledged to be a proponent of that change.
Richard
Thanks for the reply, Rich.
I believe that the Vermont law was upheld in part because the court accepted the state’s assertion of a compelling interest in elected officials performing their job, as opposed to having the time on the job reduced by their need to fundraise and campaign. Works for me.
Of course, the big question is, will support for this effort make it happen, or is the desire for shared by too few people, thus making it an issue that’s only important to voters (such as myself) who vote based on a candidate’s symmetry with voters’ beliefs?
(See, healthy skepticism, healthy skepticism.)
[...] as MTB sessions as a predictor of good political candidate choices). Here’s what I wrote in my first post about the Cordray MTB: On the issues, he’s got it all. Cordray has an excellent handle on how to [...]