The following is from Pete Hackeman, a Democrat who was considering a run for the 50th District House of Delegates seat opened up by the passing of the late, beloved Harry Parrish. In this article, Pete - who worked for Hilda Barg and David Bulova in 2005 - discusses his reasons for deciding not to run this year, and particularly the issue of his young age (23, I believe). The bottom line is this: even though Pete has worked for 7 campaigns and has had legislative experience in the Iowa Senate, he apparently was considered "too young" to run for Virginia House of Delegates. Personally, I think that maturity is defined by a great deal more than age, and Pete Hackeman strikes me as a thoughtful, mature guy...no matter what age he happens to be. Anyway, here are Pete's thoughts. I'm sure this guy will be back, whether it's in 2 years, 4 years, or when he reaches the magic age of 30!
I was always the +óGé¼+ôyoung candidate,+óGé¼-¥ as though that defined me more than the experience I brought to the table, the passion I have for justice and righteousness or the views and ideas I have.
At the end of the day, however, candidates are usually reduced to one or two key characteristics or styles, so it wasn't wholly unexpected. What was unexpected was that a small handful of people in our party seemed to hold the view that people in their 20s shouldn't be elected officials.
As with all campaigns, there will always be detractors and critics. No matter how much a candidate disagrees with those critics, and I do disagree strongly on the age issue, it is the responsibility of a candidate to listen to those criticisms and see if one can realistically overcome them. In my case, I came to the decision that it would be very difficult to have a campaign contest based on the issues before us in Northern Virginia, when opponents decided to use age, not relevant experience, as their message.
Considering that it appears that Republicans are using their right to set the election date to manipulate the system by delaying an announcement, the special election for this seat is likely to center around only one or two issues. Voters I+óGé¼Gäóve talked to want a discussion on traffic, healthcare, education, public safety and the candidate+óGé¼Gäós relevant experience, approach to government and personal integrity. I+óGé¼Gäóve come to learn over the past few days that if I ran, the focus will simply be on my age, because some of the other side don+óGé¼Gäót want a discussion on the issues and don+óGé¼Gäót want to have to propose solutions. That would be a tragedy.
I considered running for the House of Delegates because I believe strongly that we all have a responsibility to help better our community and state. I+óGé¼Gäóve always been attracted to government because it is where I think we can do the most good for the most people.
Despite not running this year, I will continue to work toward that goal. I can not imagine a life where I don+óGé¼Gäót work for better government, because I feel a special responsibility to give back to a community that gave so much to me and to ensure real opportunity like I+óGé¼Gäóve had in my life.
I grew up in a loving, middle class home, where I had the chance to spend time with both parents, and not have to worry about whether we could afford school supplies, medicine or food. Today, I don+óGé¼Gäót feel confident that our special way of life is within reach for every family, and through no fault of their own, too many young people in our state don+óGé¼Gäót have the same opportunities, and too many parents don+óGé¼Gäót have the same options.
Our success over the last few years have created new challenges and brought back some old ones.
Housing prices are up, but affordable housing is out of reach for many public servants and property taxes are growing dramatically.
Our education system is the jewel of Virginia, but tomorrow+óGé¼Gäós classrooms will be fuller and more diverse in life experience, language and student needs.
Our economy is booming, but our transportation system is failing to keep up and needs a stable, steady stream of funding and vigorous oversight to become more efficient.
Our healthcare system is too expensive for many small businesses and individuals, leaving people without coverage and taxpayers footing the bill for coverage of the uninsured.
These are the challenges that state government needs to address, and I continue to believe that all of us, young and old, have a responsibility to try and a perspective to contribute.
Government is not the sole answer to our problems, but it does need to be part of the solution. For that to happen, we need to willing to accept all good-intentioned people in our campaigns and in our government.
We need to get to a point where people look past characteristics like age, race, gender, and sexual orientation, and instead focus on experience, values, priorities and hard work. It is what we need to do for our party, our communities and our state.
I+óGé¼Gäóm excited to continue that work, and I+óGé¼Gäóm committed to building our local party, where attrition of activists and a dearth of willing candidates for local offices have left us in a precarious place. We have to build our parties from the ground up and we have to be willing to do the hard work to have electoral success.
Then again, I've already told you about my experience.
My view is, age shouldn't matter if the candidate has the drive especially these more local races, younger candidates have a better option in the local races to go do meet and greets all over their districts.
But then again..i'm biased here being young =OP
Second, this is not an anti-Richmond diary in any way. The leadership in Richmond was overwhelmingly supportive. While no one can ever agree with all the decisions others make, I think that the House Caucus leadership and staff, and the same for the State Party, are helping candidates and campaigns be more successful, aggressive and modern.
Third, I have heard through my GOP friends and supporters (hey, they know their party has left them and that to be a true conservative these days is to be without a party) that the Republicans planned to make this the one and only issue they would focus on. I venture to guess that the issue environment, state-level and national, leaves them with nothing but a vague race-baiting and "drown the government" message. So they know that to win, they must tear down the Dem nominee on a personal level. Sadly, there are few men and women of honor left in their party (Harry Parrish being the most obvious, and John Mason over in Fairfax City being another good example).
But just because the GOP was prepared to be even more indefensible doesn't mean we should be.
I also pointed out that J. Sargeant Reynolds was 24 or 25 when he got elected to the House of Delegates. John F. Kennedy was 29 when he was elected to Congress, 35 when elected to the Senate. Martin Luther King was 29 when he led the Montgomery Bus Boycott and 34 when he marched on Washington. Harold Ford, Jr. was 26 when he was elected to Congress. In short, age is nothing but a number. The real issue should be a candidate's experience, wisdom, and vision.
And if the Republicans attack any Democrat as too young, just say two words: "Jeff Frederick". He was 28.
What do you think of the party's willingness to field candidate's everywhere? Is it just something they don't support because of the money? Or what?
Young people are an essential part of the process and I think that it is good to see people take a shot. It is important for the party elders to not look at age as a quallification, especially since it was already considered. The Constitution sets age limits on the offices that can be held and they are reasonable...
It takes the efforts of people like Pete and other young candidates to invole young Americans in the process. Not to mention that electing a young candidate is like investing in the future. That person can rise through the ranks and make a significant difference in the party and in the government as a whole....
It is sad that age can be such an immediate disqualification...
JD