Posted on 02/01/2002 9:29:46 AM PST by thoughtfully_conservative
Stretching the Limits of Bi-Partisanship:
The Case of Dick Riordan
Arthur Bruzzone RightTurns.com
February 1, 2002
President Bush learned his bi-partisanship in Texas out of necessity. In the West, partisan politics is serious business. If you want be a partisan lawmaker or governor, you can expect political stalemate, or politically taxing win-loss contests on almost every issue or bill. Worse, in the West, if you use ideology to fight battles in statehouses or at city hall, you can exhaust valuable political capital winning arguments and not solving problems.
President George W. Bush has successfully transplanted his Texas bi-partisanship to Washington. A recent Battleground Poll 2002 referred to President Bush as the "Bi-Partisan President". The Poll results released at the beginning of January confirm that the President's has been effective in his efforts to outreach to non-republicans. Sixty-five (65%) percent admit to a 'new tone' in Washington, and seventy-three (73%) percent believe he has successfully reached out to democrats. The Poll concludes, "partisan politics aside, it is clear that George W. Bush has solidified his position as leader of the country and not just his party."
Now out of Los Angeles comes a hyper version of this kind of politics: "Non-partisanship leadership". This is what Former Mayor Richard Riordan is calling it in his run for governor of California. Riordan hopes he can skirt the political minefields of his own party and compensate for Republicans' low registration by stressing problem solving over ideology.
Vicious ideological battles have characterized California Republican politics for the last several years. The results have been disastrous. California Republicans can claim only one statewide elected official, Secretary of State Bill Jones; he's one of Riordan's primary opponents. Nor does Riordan subscribe to the East Coast, big-city model of handling the touchy social issues of the Republican Party. He doesn't follow other republicans mayors like Rudolf Giuliani who employ an 'in your face', politically correct attitude on those issues that drive social conservatives crazy.
Riordan instead tries to be disengaged from these issues. Still he was forced to come out clearly against gay marriages in a recent televised debate with his GOP rivals.
Aside from a disengagement from divisive social issues, the new bi-partisanship has three features: employing business school models to address public policy, stressing education above all, and splitting political culture from political activism.
Riordan's 'non-partisanship' has its roots in an experience shared with G. W. Bush: starting and managing businesses. Dick Riordan is co-founder of Riordan & McKenzie, a law firm that concentrates in part on business startups and turnarounds. Its commercial livelihood depends on success and achievement. Consensus building is vital to launch or turn around a business, and at all levels of the business - employees and management. There's no room for ideology here (or for running a baseball team).
Second, education is critical; it anchors the jobs of the new economy. It has been a vital concern for Riordan as mayor and private philanthropist, and it's been a primary issue for the President (and the First Lady). Conservatives are often quick to address education problems with ideological solutions. The new bi-partisanship instead stresses results -- child literacy and reading and practical programs that work. President Bush spent many hours with Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) to ensure passage of his education bill, which emphasized accountability and results. First Lady Laura Bush in recent congressional hearings stressed the need for higher teacher's salaries to draw talented teachers to the critical early child learning period.
Third, the new 'bi-partisanship' also recognizes the difference between political culture and political action. Too often political activism is an attempt to achieve political recognition.
So Republicans have had to recognize the changing face of America, which is so apparent in the West and Southwest. California republicans and for that matter the national party refused until recently to recognize the demographic changes occurring. Los Angeles is a city of hundreds of ethnic minorities-and as many diverse neighborhoods. Dick Riordan recognized this and acknowledged it daily. By acknowledging and working within the new political realities, Riordan built trust and cooperation. He, like Governor George Bush, was re-elected with over 60% of the vote.
The Democrats have no choice but to be partisan. As the party out of power they must try ideological themes like the much recycled "party of the rich" or "tax breaks for big business" themes. Dick Riordan in California will attempt to take it a step further.
As a member of the party out of power in California, he will attempt to attack his opponent -incumbent Democrat California Gov. Gray Davis-on grounds of incompetence; failed economic, education and energy policies. His opponent has instead already begun negative ads emphasizing his positions on social issues. It remains uncertain whether a muted ideological battle will inspire Republican voters to turn out to vote.
But if the Battleground Poll is reflective of all America, voters of all parties are looking for less talk and more solutions, and may reward successful problem solvers with their votes.
Write to Arthur at bruzzone@rightturns.com
"It is already known that former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, a possible Republican candidate for governor, has donated to Gov. Gray Davis' campaign in the past.
But in filings released Tuesday, Riordan's wife, Nancy Daly, is also recorded as having given to the Davis re-election committee.
Listed as a children's rights activist, she contributed $10,000 to the governor in March.
Also of note, Nancy Daly's ex-husband, Los Angeles Dodgers CEO Robert Daly, gave $10,000 to Davis.
Robert Daly was married 30 years to Nancy Daly before she entered into her second marriage with Riordan in 1992.
The only question: Should Riordan run, for whom will she vote?"
"“Why are you taking this tour?” I ask the young guy behind me as we await our walk-through of the Getty House, Los Angeles’ official mayoral residence.
......
We’re lined up in front of the residence, at 605 S. Irving Blvd. in Hancock Park–adjacent Windsor Square. Mayor Tom Bradley lived here for 16 years, but Mayor Richard Riordan decided to remain in his own not-insubstantial Brentwood home and use Getty House for official functions — but first he spiffed it up. He created the private nonprofit Getty House Foundation and appointed his wife, Nancy Daly Riordan, its chairperson."
Riordan is just too good for us 'peasants'. {;~)
"Meanwhile, in Bel-Air, agents say a house owned by Nancy Daly Riordan, wife of Los Angeles mayor Richard Riordan, is in contract for about $7 million. It went on the market about a year ago for $11.5 million, and has been reduced several times. Mrs. Riordan owned the home before the couple married in 1998. The gated, Mediterranean-style home has eight bedrooms, and measures about 9,000 square feet. It was built in 1929 and has a tennis court, a guest house and pool."
Shall we discuss 'wealthy businessman' Bill Simon some more?
Riordan was a very popular mayor in Los Angeles. He would have won another term hands down if it had not been for term limits.
Because the Democrats knew he was one of theirs ... they liked the color of his money.
This is the only thing I can agree with you about. That's because Bradley was a Democrat and he certainly was not popular with me.
Riordan must be doing something right. He's got Simon and Davis shaking. Both of them are running ads against him and you don't run ads like that against someone who is losing.
Go ahead, vote for Davis, I don't care.
What makes you think I or anyone else here would vote for Davis? He's just as liberal as Riordan. I have never voted for a Democrat, and I won't start now no matter how bad the Republican is. I don't HAVE to vote.
Yes, but he is Dick Riordan...
Where did I say you were voting for Davis? There are people on these Riordan threads that have said that they would vote for Davis if it came down to Davis/Riordan.
Riordan must be doing something right ... we don't hear anywhere near this much ruckus about how bad Davis is. In the meantime:
GO RIORDAN GO!!!
It implied that I said I would vote for him. I wouldn't. Most Freepers wouldn't vote for him no matter what. But Riordan is no better. I can't in good moral conscience cast a vote that would be the ultimate destruction of the Republican Party.
Bill Simon is the party's best hope in beating Gray Davis. He definitely doesn't have the baggage that Riordan has, and has the intelligence to debate Davis and win.
Riordan may have been smart at one point -- he did amass a fortune -- but even you will have to admit that he's losing it. He doesn't know what he says, what he means, and he contradicts himself almost every time he opens his mouth. We can pray for him, but I pray that he'll step down and enjoy his golden years out of the Republican political arena.
Sheesh, real estate in California has really gone down the tubes on the last year, hasn't it?
Actually I would likely vote for Davis, if it would ensure the defeat of Riordan. Would not be a big difference for the people of California, but would be a difference in demonstrating that DIABLOizing the GOP does not work.
People don't want to live here as much as they used to. I hear real estate prices are soaring in Arizona, Nevada and Oregon.
Anyone (besides the rabbit lady) have any ideas how we can change that?
This is a guy who doesn't know the difference between fiberglass and fiber optics.
This is a guy who admitted he didn't know where Southeast Asia was.
Putting Riordan at the helm of the GOP in California is kind of like putting the third mate at the helm of the Exxon Valdez.
He is a disaster waiting to happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.