When it comes to local suburban elections, some people “get it” and some don’t.

While these elections can be, and often are, simple popularity contests, they have the potential for being very issue-driven – as this last mayoral election proved.  That’s because local suburban elections (unlike elections at the state and national level) tend to deal with people, facts and issues that are more familiar to the voters and, therefore, can be more readily understood by them with even a modest effort.

Which is why you can tell those who “get it” from those who don’t by how they view local politics and local political campaigns. 

The “get its” talk about matters of substance, like a candidate’s record, policies and positions on the issues.  The “don’ts” dwell on irrelevancies like personality and style.  And when the election is over, more often than not the “don’ts” will attribute a candidate’s win or loss to the kind of campaign he/she ran, as in “Candidate X ran a great campaign” rather than “Candidate X had the best ideas.” 

And because the “don’ts” deal in personalities and style rather than substance, they tend to regard political campaigns and the whole electoral process as something dirty, distasteful and divisive rather than something to be celebrated.

Which is why we take issue with outgoing Park Ridge Park District Commissioner Dick Barton’s letter to the editor in last week’s Park Ridge Journal (“Future Is At Stake,” April 15, 2009), which opens with: “Let the healing begin.”

What, exactly, needs to be “healed”, Mr. Barton?  Free elections, and the vigorously-contested campaigns that precede them, display the health of our democratic Republic.  They are events to be celebrated and cherished, not illnesses which require healing and recovery.  

Barton bemoans these local political campaigns for “the friction they create between neighbors, church members, those in civic organizations of all types, and between rival groups of candidate supporters.” But the “friction” of ideas and policies rubbing against each other in competition for the voters’ attention and support is usually how the best ideas and policies – and the candidates who espouse them – are identified and endorsed.  

That’s why a candidate’s substance – his/her principles, policies and ideas – are far more important than his/her style – the organizations to which he belongs to, the charities to which she contributes, or the boards on which he serves.  And that’s why John Adams advised: “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” 

If a record of community service were the chief qualification for public office, a case could be made for filling every office with a member of the clergy – which would be a recipe for disaster, as the government of Iran demonstrates.   

Barton asks those who participated in the election to “put away our petty disagreements” and “work as a real community.”  We’re not sure what election he is describing, but we don’t recall any “petty disagreements” between Mayor Howard Frimark and mayor-elect Dave Schmidt – unless he considers “petty” the very real differences expressed by the two candidates on such significant matters as honest and transparent government, infrastructure, taxes, spending and debt, and development.  

We sure don’t, and we’re betting that neither do the 8,655 citizens who did their civic duty by voting.

Rather than harming the community, the electoral process is the essential act by which a “real community” goes about governing itself.  The candidates and their supporters did, indeed, “work as a real community” in the weeks and months leading up to April 7th, as did the voters who cast their votes.

They are the ones who “get it.”  And they are the ones who deserve our gratitude.