I really don't understand all the hoo-rah being raised about unions contributing money to various candidates for political office.

To be sure, we should always be concerned about any special interest groups contributing large sums of money to a particular candidate's electoral run. But shouldn't we be just as concerned about those who complain about an incumbent's challenger and where his or her campaign contributions come from? An example of this might be complaining about a challenger's contributions coming from those evil unions, a claim of 2/3 when in fact it was just over half. Would it be fair to say this might be a bit hypocritical when that same "hard core Republican" incumbent receives significant dollar contributions from serious Democrats? Campaign finance reports are, after all, available on-line these days. Bummer.

I always thought the first lesson in lawyers' school was to never ask a question for which one doesn't already know the answer. As with a mind, a public forum question is a horrible thing to waste, especially over that evil union money. One must wonder if Wally World, JC Penny, Sears, Bi-Lo, McD's, Schmuckatelli's Muffler Bearing Shop, and any other establishment that accepts that evil union money are equally as evil as the political candidate who accepts those evil union money campaign contributions.

Again, I'm not a union guy and never have been. But is it realistic to obsess over unions as some appear to do? When they have equally challenging financial issues themselves? And then they turn around and opine that questioning the sources of one's funding is nothing more than hardcore politics?

When I see a candidate in a local race raising, and/or spending, three and four times what an elected office pays, I must pause and investigate that candidate a bit more closely. Since Mr. Kenny Smith seems to have caused so much angst about that evil union money, let's look at his credentials as an example.

It's been said that managers operate in the system, leaders operate on the system.

I don't know Mr. Smith personally but have heard him speak and seen him at various functions. By all accounts he's a good guy. I have close friends who tell me he's a very good guy, but let's get past all that good guy/bad guy stuff and be brutally honest about qualifications.

Mr. Smith began his career as an electrician. Every good electrician has, at the very least, blown a #2 phillips or 1/4" common screwdriver in two, fused the jaws of a pair of channel locks, blown his voltmeter across the room, and knows about the pretty fireworks to be had by getting across two phases of a 480 volt power line with a hunk of metal. If they haven't they're not an electrician. I can't attest to Mr. Smith's qualifications as an electrician but someone apparently has faith in his abilities, since he's worked his way through the system to become the director of the IBEW's training program here locally, no small feat in itself.

Mr. Smith ran for a seat on our Hamilton County School Board and has served more than one term as its chairman since being elected. He ran for office telling his prospective constituents that he wanted to do away with the single track curriculum in our schools, wanted to see a trades program re-implemented in our schools, accountability of our school administrators, and more efficient use of our tax dollars by the school system.

Right now, today, some of our schools are falling down around our children's and grandchildren's ears. On the most recent Tennessee school report card, Hamilton County had one more school failing than when Mr. Smith took office and the schools had not improved over all in the least, while more tax dollars are spent on our schools than all but one other county in the state ... but our director of schools, hired from out of town and the highest paid employee in Hamilton County, tells us "Our schools are not failing." And as chairman of the School Board Mr. Smith sat there while an extension of the director of schools, the director who's concerned more about receiving funding for failing programs and schools than he is educating our children and stewardship of our tax dollars, was developed in secrecy, proposed and passed by surprise, and it was fully within Mr. Smith's power as chairman to have put the quietus on the entire process.

Our schools require more of our tax dollars every year with fewer results and threats of ever greater deficits without additional funding, but the administration and operations employees, teachers, and studii are all accountable. We just haven't been able to pin anyone down to get an official definition of accountability.

I know of several people who have had very positive results on an individual basis when they've taken problems to Mr. Smith that their own board members could not or would not handle. But is this working in the system or working on the system? What was done to correct the problems those folks were experiencing so the next person didn't have to confront those same challenges?

Do we have a trades program in our schools, any track other than a college preparatory track? No. I submit that to have done so would actually be a conflict with Mr. Smith's day job as director of a competitive training program. Certainly, that competitive program would benefit from having new enrollees who can read, write, and cipher, but to train students in a public school for careers in industrial trades would be like sleeping with the enemy. In fact, our one career technical high school, Sequoyah, was almost shut down this past year, with Mr. Smith seated as chairman of the school board.

And Sequoyah still doesn't have a library, but every elementary school in Hamilton County does. This, while Mr. Smith was also our school board chairman.

You know we have to watch those little things,
That you do,
That show us,
What you're really up to

Oh, Mr. Goldsboro. I am so sorry for butchering your song. I actually like "Little Things" in its original form.

None of this is in any manner intended to denigrate Mr. Smith's abilities. He's a good manager. But is he a good leader? That's the question. A good leader would have brought all the forces to bear on changing some of these problems instead of allowing them to remain the same or, as in some instances, get even worse.

Mr. Kenny Smith has shown himself to be a good manager who's capable of working within the system, but what actual leadership skills has he shown? What has he done to operate on the system he was elected to change and we all know still needs serious improvement? He's had four years to strut his stuff and we haven't seen a lot of leadership, any willingness to make those difficult decisions. Mr. Smith has had an opportunity, had his turn at bat. He hasn't struck out, but neither has he stuck out, so perhaps it's time to give someone else a turn rather than electing Mr. Smith to another, higher office.

And all our hardcore politicians can do is try to cause enough of a hoo-rah to make everyone look in the poison ivy for those dastardly "union bosses?"

Forget the hoo-ah. How about a little "Ooo-rah!" Let's have some leadership.

Mr. Smith is but one example of a contested race wherein we, as voters, must make some difficult decisions. Do we want a leader or do we want a manager? Shouldn't we be making all of our voting decisions based upon who's the most qualified rather than who's the nicest person or who raises the most money? I submit that yes, we should be demanding the best and the finest, the most highly qualified for any and all elected offices.

For the second time, I'm diving off the wagon. The girls and I are going down to buy some ice cream.

Royce E. Burrage, Jr.
Royce@Officially Chapped.org