The 62 Project: #’s 24 & 38
#24: Rep. Kim Williams (D-19th RD)
The District: This was former Speaker Bob Gilligan‘s district practically forever. Put it this way: Bob was in Dover when I arrived, in Dover when I left. And that was before serving two terms as Speaker. Uh, him, not me. A classic working-class district that has fallen onto pretty hard times due to the loss of auto jobs at Boxwood. Kirkwood Highway runs east-west through the district from Newport to Stanton. Here’s the map (PDF). Huge registration edge to the D’s: 7615 D; 3599 R; and 4331 I. Yep, more I’s than R’s. These are dyed-in-the-wool Joe Biden D’s. Lotsa blue-collar workers, displaced blue-collar workers, retired blue-collar workers, and their families. In other words, not Jack Markell D’s.
Kim Williams is among three newcomers who have displayed extraordinary promise during the 2013 legislative session. Consider the number 24 as merely a placeholder as it reflects her lack of time in Dover. She’s moving higher. Not only does she have the right profile for a citizen-legislator, she has demonstrated that conscience and effectiveness are not mutually exclusive.
Williams was elected as Gilligan’s successor in 2012. She edged Bill Dunn in the D primary, 692-585, and handily dispatched R Dennis Cini, 5895-3101, in the general. Bill Dunn had originally targeted the race for County Council President, but switched to this one once Gilligan retired.
Kim Williams and her family have experienced the stark economic realities of Delaware’s economy first-hand. Her husband Carl worked at the GM Boxwood plant for 29 years before the facility shut down. Kim worked her way up to an office manager position with a union electrical contractor. She resigned to stay at home with her children when Carl’s hours changed at the plant. As a stay-at-home mom, Williams threw herself into volunteering at her kids’ schools. Did I say, ‘threw herself into volunteering’?:
Being a stay-at-home mom gave me the opportunity to be involved in my children’s school from day one. I began helping in the classroom and regularly attended PTA meetings. I quickly learned what an important role parental support plays in the schools and have been active in my children’s schools ever since. I started out serving as PTA Treasurer, volunteered weekly for the HOST reading program; I eventually was elected PTA President four times serving four-one year terms at Forest Oak Elementary School. My daughter Casey entered Conrad Schools of Science for 6th grade where I was elected Vice President of the PTO. I have served on Conrad’s Building Leadership Team for the last 5 years. I have served on many committees throughout the years: Program Assemblies, Teacher Appreciation, Family Nights, Fundraiser, and Membership, in which I was recognized by the State PTA. I was a co-leader of my daughter’s Brownie Troop and then became a leader of her Girl Scout Troop.
I was co-editor of a blog Fix Red Clay, which focused on issues concerning Red Clay School District. It provided the community with a place to share their opinions and concerns about the Red Clay School District and gave me a valuable insight into how the public really felt about our school system and our district.
Which led to Kim taking an active role on the Red Clay School Board. She wrote this prior to being elected State Representative:
In 2009, I was asked to run for District E school board seat against a sitting board member and I won. I have served on the board for three years; serving one year as vice president. I currently serve on the following board committees: Board Policy Committee, Community Financial Committee, and Communications Committee. I still serve on the Building Leadership Committee at Conrad Schools of Science. In 2009, I approached the principal of Conrad about running a fundraiser specifically for the student’s class accounts to help raise money for the students. The funds raised are set aside in the account of each class to off-set costs of field trips, homecoming, proms etc.
I honestly can’t think of anyone whose background better suits them to be a citizen-legislator than Kim Williams. She has placed her conscience and her priorities right up front during her first year. She called out the secret non-public deliberations on the charter schools clusterbleep. She successfully sponsored legislation to cut red tape out of the public school choice process, making the process much easier for students and parents. It was the only bill she sponsored. And it was damned important. There’s a lot to be said for knowing your strengths and concentrating on them. Other legislators would do well to take heed. She was also a prime co-sponsor on SB 147, which requires that charter schools ‘include innovation information in their annual reports and that the Secretary of Education report on how successes at charter schools can be implemented throughout Delaware’s public education system. It further establishes a “Committee for Promoting Charter-District Collaboration” to consider the current state of collaboration between public charter schools and traditional public schools and to develop recommendations for strengthening such collaboration.’
She has also been a stalwart when it comes to supporting equal rights for everybody, both on marriage equality and gender identity. And she co-sponsored legislation requiring criminal background checks on private gun purchases.
The only criticism I’ve heard about her is that some legislators believe that she is too unwilling to compromise on her principles. As you can imagine, that’s hardly a minus in my book.
I’ve never met her, but I really like her. Spoiler Alert: She’ll finish much higher on my 2013 MVP (most valuable to the progressive cause) list than this one. For now, the only impediment to her placing higher here is simply lack of time in Dover. We’ve got your back, Kim.
#38. Rep. W. Charles ‘Trey’ Paradee (D-29th RD)
The District: The 29th RD runs north/south, and encompasses the town of Cheswold, parts of Clayton and Smyrna, and areas west of Dover and Wyoming. Here is the map (PDF). Registration for this Kent County district is as follows: 6462 D; 4691 R; and 3597 I. Redistricting took away much of the area that had provided the margin for Paradee’s predecessor, Lincoln Willis, including the auto dealership which carries the Willis family name. A very well-engineered redrawing of the lines. The district’s demographics have changed, with suburban communities overriding some of the previously more rural character of the district. In other words, while there may be more roadkill now, there are fewer people eating it.
Trey Paradee both won…and lost a 2008 challenge to long-term incumbent Pam Thornburg. The initial count showed Paradee winning, but it turns out that someone (who may or may not have feasted on roadkill) accidentally transposed some numbers, and Paradee came 50 votes shy of victory. Thornburg had basically retired, but hadn’t told anybody, while engaged in a long-term relationship with a powerful lobbyist who resides far outside of her district. She phoned and congratulated Paradee, and probably felt just a tinge of disappointment when she found out that she had won. Paradee passed on a 2010 run due to family challenges, but surprised a lot of people in taking out one of the R’s few touted ‘faces of tomorrow’, Linc Willis, by a 5183-4358 margin in 2012. While not a landslide, that’s a solid margin against a credible incumbent.
Trey Paradee has been the single greatest disappointment to progressives among the 2012 newcomers. Despite expressing support for equal rights for same sex couples back in 2008, Paradee voted against marriage equality. He largely opposed most gun control measures. He did, however, vote to release the minimum wage bill from the House Business Lapdog Committee, which is indeed encouraging. (This is a correction that clarifies his position on minimum wage.)
Now, while he technically did not ‘go back on his word’ on gay marriage (the initial comments dealing with civil unions), he diligently ‘worked the refs’ to create at least a sense of good will from progressives, including me. He convinced me that this district was not the stereotypical Kent County district of 20 years ago, and then voted as if it was. Fool me once…
When you look at Paradee’s bio, coupled with his first year in Dover, you have to wonder whether he has any progressive principles, or principles of any kind. This, in fact, may well be the main reason that Paradee ran for office:
Trey’s family first settled in Delaware in the mid-1600s, and he is the 7th member of the Paradee family to serve in the Delaware General Assembly.
And this doesn’t scream progressive, (or for that matter, my definition of Democrat, to me):
In 2001, Trey was recruited by Merrill Lynch to work as a financial advisor. In 2003, Trey joined Edward Jones Investments and opened an investment and financial planning office in downtown Dover. In 2011, Trey opened his own investment and financial planning firm, Paradee Financial, LLC, which is also located in Dover. Trey’s firm provides investment and financial services for individuals and small businesses and helps families invest for college and retirement. Trey currently serves as a Special Trustee on the Delaware Technical and Community College Educational Foundation Investment Advisory Committee and Development Council.
So, this guy is firmly ensconced representing the financial industry interests on the House Business Lapdog Committee, and he’s part of the Lonnie George/Mark Brainard Del-Tech money grab.
Paradee has sponsored one good bill of note, HB 148, which would ‘direct the Office of the State Treasurer to add a Roth option to state sponsored 403(b) and 457(b) savings plans that are offered to eligible teachers and state employees.’ And, yes, I’m enjoying the Battle of the Egos going on between Paradee and Flowers. I’m rooting for ‘neither’ to emerge victorious.
Here’s the deal. It was Paradee who argued that his district was far more sophisticated and receptive to social progress than had been thought. And he was right. Barack Obama won this Kent County district, 5282-4613. There was no chance in hell that Obama would have even come close in that district 20 years ago. Yet, Paradee has voted as if his district hasn’t changed in 20 years.
Here’s one thing about working the refs. You can make it work once, then you have your record, which defines you better than you can define yourself.
Paradee looks to be taking the non-Democratic Democratic route. He can strive to either distinguish himself in the Delaware General Assembly, or he can be satisfied with fulfilling the family legacy. I hope for the former, but I’m betting on the latter. Although that minimum wage bill gives us some reason to hope…
Tags: El Somnambulo, Featured, Rep. Kim Williams Delaware, Rep. Trey Paradee Delaware, Steve Tanzer Delaware
I still have warm feelings for Paradee based on how he called out Willis directly for being a Republican.
It is important that the small time local R’s don’t get to divorce themselves from the national party.
Am I being played? I don’t really care.
Not saying he should be defeated. Just saying that I’ll focus my efforts elsewhere.
Of course. I don’t even think campaign utterances should be given any weight in your scheme. I’m just saying why I still like him. But I’ve always been more about elections than governance.
Let me take issue with something.
Which concluded this:
This is a non-sequitor. The description above could probably be applied to another legislator that I bet will rank significantly higher:
This neither proves or disproves your charge, but it makes your assertion baseless.
Not when coupled with how and who he’s chosen to serve, it doesn’t.
Plus the representation is Trey’s and Trey’s alone.
If I were a financial planner for one of the big firms, I’d try to make it sound as warm and fuzzy as I could as well.
Let him actually speak up for these ‘individuals and small businesses’ as opposed to the financial service industry, and then we might talk.
Hey, he can vote to release the minimum wage bill from committee. Do something to show that he supports people in need, the traditional Democratic constituency. So far, he hasn’t.
My point is that being a financial planner, no matter the firm that you might serve, doesn’t necessarily imply that you are in the pockets of the financial industry. Paul Baumbach is evidence of that.
True, you have a point. But when your votes and priorities mirror your occupation, then it’s fair to point that out, especially since I’m trying to rank based on effective action on progressive principles.
Baumbach has demonstrated that he has progressive principles, Paradee so far has not. BTW, LG, and this goes for everybody, please let me know how YOU feel about the legislators I highlight. Mine is only one perspective, and I’d like to know yours. Especially when you disagree. This series has become as much of a learning experience as it has a teaching opportunity for me.
One more point that I didn’t make in the article, but probably should have.
While co-sponsoring legislation generally doesn’t mean all that much to me, when someone co-sponsors lots of legislation, it generally provides a good sense as to what their priorities are. Feel free to compare and contrast the co-sponsor lists of Williams and Paradee. I think they say a lot about priorities:
Kim Williams:
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/lis147.nsf/vwLegBySponsor/?searchview&query=K.%20Williams&count=1000&start=1&vw=Legislation%20%20By%20Sponsor
Paradee:
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/lis147.nsf/vwLegBySponsor/?searchview&query=Paradee&count=1000&start=1&vw=Legislation%20%20By%20Sponsor
Yes, all I was suggesting was that you hadn’t made your case. I imagine that the links you provided do so to some extent, although my quick perusal didn’t reveal much to my untrained eye.
I don’t really have a dog in the fight, but I would hate for financial planners to get smeared as a proxy for the uber-wealthy Wall St types.
I take your point. Otherwise, do you think I’ve not ranked him highly enough?
Like I said, I don’t have a vested interest in his position on your list.
Carry on.
I wish there was a way to explain to someone whose district is very blue, what it is like to live in a district where the president you support, is disliked by twice as many people as support him…. 60-30… red.
Then, to be those people’s representatives on top of it. If you were a progressive going in, you can’t be one very long.
The long term goal needs to be to turn those districts blue, or make them 50-50 red/blue. That is done through infusion, education, activism, and socializing…. Since a representative represents his people, then more progressive things can be expected to come out of that district as the district becomes more progressive. Personally I’m thankful for any district that counts as blue, in order to keep blue in control of the House.
The problem with Delaware’s Reds was that even for their district, they are simply too nuts. Trey effectively pointed that out, and Dems got a blue notch from his doing so….
I don’t think you can get a progressive out of a red district, whether it is in Sussex County or Arkansas. I’m just happy if they are blue, because that aligns the state as a whole, more towards getting things voted on and done, instead of what we had in the Copeland years of finger pointing and zero accomplishment. Greg Lavelle still lovingly embodies that ineptitude this very day.
Would John or Paul be as they are, if they were in Trey’s district? Would they even be elected, if they were in Trey’s district?
Uh, Kavips? Obama WON the 29th District. I wrote that, perhaps you overlooked that.
Paradee made the argument to me that the district was far from a red district, and was more like a suburban New Jersey district.
He’s just not voting like it.
I’m not saying he could or should be Baumbach or Kowalko. Just saying that he should be more attuned to a progressive agenda than he is. Especially since he effectively convinced me that he was.
Paradee has been outspoken in support of increasing the minimum wage and did, in fact, vote to release the bill from the committee. Where is El Som The All-Knowing getting his information?
I’ve been checking on this as you’ve been writing, as someone else has raised this issue.
The committee meeting minutes do not show who voted to release the bill from committee nor, for that matter, who voted to keep the bill in committee. We know which members were present for part of the meeting, but not whether or not they were present when the vote was taken. The minutes DO say that 7 voted to table the bill, but do not say that the other 4 voted to release the bill.
Since the bill was not released from committee, there was no backer to be signed by the legislators. The committee minutes are, admittedly, incomplete. Here is the only voting record from the committee minutes:
“Rep. Keeley motioned to release the bill from committee; Rep. D.E. Williams seconded the motion. The bill did not have enough support to be released from committee.
Rep. Q. Johnson motioned to table the bill; Rep. Gray seconded the motion. The bill was set aside with 7 votes to table.”
I’m trying to get clarification and, if I’m wrong, I’ll issue a mea culpa. Hey, I’m not perfect, and I’ll own up to my mistake once it’s clarified. It is indeed possible that I confused the death penalty bill with the minimum wage bill. But I don’t know yet. Should have an answer soon.
I did totally overlook that entire paragraph. 🙁
The longterm plan must be to turn those red districts blue. Perhaps having Thornburg in that spot for so long, did us a favor after all.
Kavips, it’s a different district now as well. More suburban, less rural. This was one of Pete’s masterpieces during redistricting. Subtle, yet effective.
@LE: Would you still feel the employer of a financial services professional didn’t matter if the employer was Foster Friess? Because I know people who work for his firm and I can attest that, in my admittedly limited experience, it matters a lot. You won’t find any progressives in that shop.
Trey has told me on a couple of occasions that he supports raising the minimum wage and that he voted to release the bill from committee.
If that’s the case, then I was both wrong and misinformed, and I apologize to Trey and to the readers.
It likely would have impacted his ranking just a little but, since the list is subject to change, I will wait until the list is complete to do some rejiggering. It’s a complicated project as it is.
I am going to rewrite the incorrect part of this post, but I’ll retain all comments so that the mistake and the reaction are memorialized.
Geezer – I assume that you meant LG, rather than LE. The question wasn’t whether he was a progressive because of his profession, but rather his profession determined whether he was in the pocket of financial institutions. I give you Paul Baumbach as a guy who deserves a top 5 ranking on this list as a freshman yet that does financial advising on his off days.
Perhaps they are different models (fee for service v. commission-based) but the guys in the financial advising trenches are quite a bit more diverse than the generals in the big financial firms.
According to good sources who were in the room when the vote was taken, Paradee and Keeley were the only two Democrats who raised their hands to release the bill. The other Democrats and all the Republicans on the committee voted to table the bill. Paradee also co-signed the letter supporting the prevailing wage that was in the News Journal. Several Democrats did not add their names in support of prevailing wage. This should definitely be taken into consideration for your rankings.
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20131116/OPINION07/311160007/Prevailing-wage-good-Delaware-workers
LG, while you’re indeed a geek, we also consider you to be deserving of elite status.
Take it as a compliment.
Well, Anon, if that’s true then the same source who told me that Paradee voted yes would be incorrect in stating that both Williams and Baumbach also voted yes.
In fact, if we’re basing it on numbers, and assuming that all 11 were present, we know that 7 voted to table. That was in the minutes. That would leave Keeley, Baumbach, Williams and Paradee voting yes. Otherwise, there would have been nine voting to table, right?
@LG: Very sorry about the wrong initials there. I get your point. I just wanted to get in my shot at Foster Friess. Neither of the folks I know were all that conservative before they went to work for him — at least, they weren’t outspoken about it. Now they are. I have a hard time believing that’s coincidence.
Baumbach and Paradee are both independent financial advisors. It’s a shame that Paul will drop below 25 on your list just because he helps people save for retirement and plan for college. Tough break, Paul. Damn.
Where did El Som say Paul would drop on the list? His point was not that obtuse about Trey and he was willing to admit where he made a mistake. Jeez, give him a break!
This was the actual vote. Confirmed from several sources.
House Economic Development/Banking/Insurance/Commerce Committee
Chairman: Bryon H. Short – NO
Vice-Chairman: Dennis E. Williams – YES
Members: Paul S. Baumbach – YES
Andria L. Bennett – NO
Ronald E. Gray – NO
S. Quinton Johnson – NO
Helene M. Keeley – YES
W. Charles Paradee – YES
Harold J. Peterman – NO
Michael Ramone – NO
Jeffrey N. Spiegelman – NO
Williams is not on the committee.
Now I’m confused. Do you mean Dennis or Kim? Dennis is the vice-chair, don’t think anyone said that Kim is on the committee.
Sorry. Kim Williams is not on the committee. Dennis E. voted YES to release.
Atkins is begging to be number 62 on your list. It would be considered an endorsement in his district. Any higher ranking would be a disappointment for the two people in his district that may read this blog.
There are about two people in that district who could read the blog…the others’ lips get too tired from trying to sound out the words.
Since we’re still several weeks away from crowning the best and worst, John may still be well-positioned to do one more stupid thing that might just push him across the finish line as #62.
I must admit that there are several worthy candidates…
Someone who read this thread but won’t comment told me that Paradee made a particular ass of himself talking about transgendered people when the LGBT issues were being discussed, ranting about how they were going to pretend to be TG just to get into the girls’ locker room, and how he didn’t want his daughters seeing some guy’s penis, etc.
I guess he has a ways to go before he becomes a New Jersey suburban Republican.
Excellent idea! I am seconding the nomination of Johnny A for #62! This is just the type of “endorsement” that Johnny A needs to put him over the top in 2014! For the sake of the Democratic majority, I beg of you to please tell the world that the progressive movement has no greater enemy in Delaware than John Atkins. With your “endorsement”, we can ensure that the Democratic Party will maintain a super-majority and continue to impose its progressive will upon Delaware. To that end, nothing would be more progressive than to anoint Johnny A with the #62 – a badge that Johnny A would proudly wear with honor.
That raises a good point. Would Trey want to be higher in this ranking?
@JohnnyAFan — you need to have one name here at DL or you are considered a sockpuppet. One that can be banned for changing your name just to mislead readers and commenters. You won’t get another warning.
Damn! And here I thought there was a genuine groundswell for ‘Johnny A’ for #62.
What to do, what to do…?