I have a shameful confession to make. Although my offense hasn't kept me awake at night, it is still very much a deep, dark sting from my past. *Takes deep breath* Alright. Here goes:
In 2002, I, Matt Spencer...voted for Mitch McConnell.
You have no idea how difficult it was to type such an admission. But now that the word is out, I can breathe a little easier. That self-imposed burden of guilt no longer rests on my shoulders.
The only reason--definitely the only reason--why I voted to re-elect McConnell in 2002 is hard to admit as well. Most Liberal and Progressive Kentuckians don't like admitting it, either: and that's the fact that Mitch McConnell has done a lot for the Commonwealth of Kentucky since he took office in 1985.
Here is a lesson for you political novices: it is risky for a relatively poor state to lose its senior senator. "Senior Senator" isn't just an honorary title indicating age or number of years served. Being any state's longest-serving senator gives seniority, which is a huge advantage in obtaining much-needed federal funding--or, "pork"--for a particular state.
Unfortunately for Mitch, he has been more preoccupied with obstructionism federal in the last four-plus years instead of attending to the Commonwealth's needs. Between that and his 2009 ranking as "one of the fifteen most corrupt members of Congress", Senator McConnell will not receive my vote in his 2014 campaign. True, Kentucky has benefitted from McConnell's 'bacon'...but with the way that the pig is being slaughtered these days, the taste just isn't worth it.
My voters of like mind have turned their attention to politically-interested, Kentucky-rooted Ashley Judd. While Ms. Judd has shown that she isn't as mentally shallow as some of her Hollywood counterparts, I am not allowing myself to become too excited about her potential candicacy, simply based on the merit that she isn't Mitch McConnell. "Why?", you may ask?
The voters must judge her on the strength of her political knowledge and that of this state.
Kentuckians rely heavily on name recognition to elect their officials. In the last few decades, that voting methodology has proved disastrous. Richie Farmer, the University of Kentucky's "Mr. Basketball" of 1988, was elected Agriculture Commissioner based on his celebrity. After a scandal involving a mistress and her high-paying state job, he's now selling cars. Jim Bunning, elected to the U.S. House and Senate from Kentucky, had a background as an investment broker--but not before his acclaimed, seventeen-year run in Major League Baseball. After being named by Time magazine as "one of America's five worst Senators" and making a series of bizarre statements (one predicting the death of Justice Ginsberg), Bunning was essentially abandoned by the Kentucky's GOP. A majority of Kentucky voters elected Rand Paul to the Senate not because of his political experience--but because he's the son of perennial Presidential candidate Ron Paul. Had Coach Rick Pitino ran for governor prior to his scandalous affair and his legendary switch from UK to UofL, he would've been a shoo-in. Even if he ran today with all of that baggage, he'd still garner an impressive number of votes.
It speaks negatively of our state that we elect politicians based on their celebrity status. We should not be surprised when such celebrity ultimately harms the Commonwealth's interests--but we should learn from our mistakes.
While I wholeheartedly support the growing interest to "Ditch Mitch", I also think that we, as voters, owe it to ourselves (and our state) to give a more discerning eye to those who vie to represent us. I look forward to hearing more about Ashley Judd's vision for Kentucky. I look forward to a potential substantive debate between her and this power-driven smarm that we've kept in office for most of my life. Still, while remembering the ghosts of Kentucky's celebrities-turned-politicians, I will encourage every voter to ask themselves:
Will they be as effective on C-SPAN--as they were on ESPN or HBO?
