Skill, experience distinguish Parker as mayoral frontrunner

By Joshua Redwine     10/1/09 7:00pm

The candidates for Houston's mayoral election visited the Rice campus last Tuesday, discussing issues important to the Latino community. During the unimpressive equivocations and political posturing, it became clear that the decision for Houston voters this year will be based more on the candidates themselves than their near-identical policies.The candidates, a trio of Democrats and a lone Republican, seem to agree on the basic outline for Houston's future. First, there needs to be an emphasis on economic growth through creation of a department/committee/czar for economic development; second, more coordinated police efforts through better cooperation and new technology; and third, improving traffic through changes in infrastructure and future improvements in public transportation. What's new?

I'm not a native Houstonian, but all these plans appear old to me. Mayors always have the same goals and they are rarely ever achieved. That is why every election focuses on the same issues. We all want less crime, more jobs and less traffic. So the primary question becomes, who will best apply this universal agenda?

Sole conservative Roy Morales is the least-qualified candidate. With only three years of experience in elected office, Morales is an unworthy choice for Houston conservatives. He has made the typical promise to lower taxes at a time when the city needs income to remain effective, and has clearly made no effort to reach beyond the conservative base. His performance in the debate was almost comical; amongst real Houston leaders he always seemed a step behind.

---

---

While he will certainly garner the support of Tea Party voters, he lacks appeal to independents and anyone who wants an experienced leader. It is fairly clear that this underwhelming candidate has neither the experience nor the notoriety to be Houston's next mayor.

The distinction between the other three candidates, however, is far less clear. Peter Brown, current City Council member, has served the city of Houston for almost five years and appears to be the safe choice for voters. Brown is fairly familiar to voters without being attached to anything substantial enough to garner controversy. (What this really means is that he hasn't done anything worth writing about.) His roots in architecture and urban planning should make infrastructure key for him, but instead he likes to talk about how he knows more about our budget than the people who create it.

Additionally, his attempt to speak broken Spanish at the debate fell completely flat. He is the candidate for the older, more conservative Democrats who seek familiarity and stability, but Brown is certainly nothing new and nothing special.

Gene Locke is more of an outsider candidate. The only African American in the race, Locke is former City Attorney for Houston. He is seeking to reenter city government with crime as a key issue, although his seven-point plan for crime is no more impressive that those of the other candidates. Locke is not a household name for Houstonians, but has gained many endorsements, including the Houston Police Officers' Union and Houston Professional Fire Fighters Association.

Still, a large portion of his support comes from being an Obama-esque candidate. As a minority candidate with merely adequate experience but lots of charisma, Locke is riding on the President's coattails. I'm not saying he lacks all qualification, but realistically, what does he know about the economy?

The fourth and final member of the race is Annise Parker (Jones '78), current Controller for the city of Houston and the candidate with the most experience. As a former City Council Member and three-term City Controller, Parker is both recognizable to voters and the best-versed in Houston government. Since taking charge, she has managed to entirely recreate the system and create a budget that is quite successful, even during a recession.

Yet Parker remains a controversial candidate for some Houstonians due to her sexuality. Parker is openly gay and, if elected, would be the first openly gay mayor of a top-10 U.S. city. But such support for the LGBT community can only be an asset to a city as large and diverse as Houston.

With Morales all but finished, it is clear the Democrats will take the office. And when it comes to experience, Parker stands above all the other candidates. Established in the Houston government, she is an asset to the city during a time of economic turmoil.

But in terms of style, Locke has the conviction and personality to push his agenda with the city officials and the public. He is energetic and hopeful, and has shown that he can see a plan through.

Brown lacks both of these traits. He has talked a lot about being close to Mayor Bill White, but being the mayor's friend does not mean he deserves the job. During a time of transformative politics and politicians, Brown is a stale option.

So the choice is clear - one must decide whether to vote for Parker's substance or Locke's style. Both qualifications are key to being a successful mayor, but in these times Parker's election would send the message that Houston is looking for a real way forward, both economically and socially. She has the most experience dealing with the issues of the office. And with an openly gay mayor, Houston would lead the progress toward equality in this country and show that the state of Texas is not the bastion of conservatism it once was.

Locke is a great guy with ideas that are pretty much as good as Parker's. But Houston does not need charisma right now. It needs leadership. That is why Houston needs Annise Parker.

Joshua Redwine is a McMurtry College freshman.

---