Fighting for ... what?

A lot of the candidates for various political offices in Carroll are either trying to win your vote with slogans and hot-button catch-phrases, or they have no clue about the duties of the offices they are running for.

But rest assured, they are all "fighting" for us.


We have board of education candidates fighting for more education dollars, sheriff and commissioner candidates fighting for our Second Amendment rights and fighting against common core, and state-level candidates fighting against environmental regulations.

Now to be sure, there are some ways that these candidates can try to have an impact on these issues in the offices they are seeking, but a much more effective way to win the fight they maintain they are so committed to would seem to be running for an office where the actual decisions are being made.


State lawmakers have some impact on environmental legislation enacted in Maryland, but to really have a chance at winning the fight, shouldn't these folks be running for Congress, so they can impact the federal environmental laws that are being handed down to the state?

It's nice that our sheriff and some commissioner candidates support the Second Amendment, but isn't the job of the sheriff to uphold the laws and the job of the commissioners to run county government?

Likewise, if you oppose common core educational standards, shouldn't you be running for the school board?

Similarly, school board candidates who want to fight for education spending should be running for county commissioner, where a majority of the school funding comes from, or they should be running for a state office, since state funding makes up another big chunk of the system's budget.

So do commissioner candidates think state and federal issues are more important than keeping the roads maintained, the water turned on and the sewage systems working, all prime duties of the office? Do sheriff candidates think supporting the Second Amendment is more important than making sure we have sufficient law enforcement coverage without breaking the bank? Are school board candidates more focused on money than educational standards? Or are these all just examples of candidates using catch phrases and hot-button issues to spout off about things they won't have much control over, all in the hope of getting your vote?

It's nice that candidates are fighting for all these things, but it really doesn't tell us much about how they will be a success in the job they are applying for.