Opinion: Don’t Undermine Strong Candidates with the ‘Lack of Experience’ Argument

Vote the Amherst for the People Slate

Today a headline of the front page of Sunday’s online edition of the New York Times, in the slyly undermining way of so many Times headlines, read—just two days before the elections—Even for Some Mamdani Supporters, His Thin Resume Is Cause for Concern.Wondering if the article itself was a more balanced piece and it was only the headline that sought to sow doubt even in the minds of Zohran Mamdani’s supporters, I read the article through to the end. Sadly, the whole article served as ammunition for the Donald-Trump-approved ruthlessly ambitious sexual predator, Andrew Cuomo. Sounding at times as if it was coming from Trump himself, it unashamedly red-baited Mamdani’s “far-left policy positions,” sowed doubt, and inflamed anxieties, putting its case against him into the mouths of the demographics who are his strongest supporters.

As I read the Times article, I asked myself where I had encountered these tactics before. The answer: right here in my little hometown of 35 years, a Democratic Party stronghold, but also a university town with a preponderance of residents with left-wing and left-leaning views. For many years, this small New England town government featured its own version of checks and balances with an elected Select Board, an appointed Town Manager, and an elected Town Meeting featuring 240 town residents, 24 from each of its ten voting precincts. Our representative Town Meeting was a modified version of the open town meeting (see also here) , a system of direct democracy prevalent in New England towns since the late 1600s.

To be honest, although it was long-winded and opinionated, the Amherst Town Meeting was not very powerful in the scheme of things—the Select Board, Town Manager, and appointed town committees ultimately took most of the decisions. Nevertheless, Town Meeting voted on the annual budget, discussed the weighty issues facing the town, voted on resolutions reflecting the views of the townspeople, and frequently slowed down development projects that sought to be hastily rammed through. This last and perhaps most important power was the one that most infuriated developers, whose costs increased as the meeting deliberated on their proposals. And eventually, opponents managed to get Town Meeting abolished and replaced that time-honored system with the one we have today: an elected Town Council made up of only 13 members. This has had the very effect so many Americans bemoan in the national government today, that of dramatically increasing the power of the executive, and severely curtailing the power of the legislative branch.

But I digress. Where had I encountered these tactics before, seeking to undermine the energy and idealism of new voices in politics? It was in my own town, in which, arguably, there are large numbers of democratic socialist (lower-case) residents but the old-school Democratic (upper-case) Party heavies tip the scales in wealth and power. Election Day for our town government is November 4, the same day as the mayoral election in New York City. As Amherst for the People, an energetic new slate of candidates, has presented itself, the same poison-pill arguments I read in the NYT this morning are seeking to undermine it, suggesting that they don’t have enough legislative experience, they are too young, too left-wing, they risk bringing the ire—and the iron fist—of the federal government upon us. In fact, collectively they are experienced in civic, labor, management, community organizing, and non-profit work.

With all due respect to my generation, the entrenched forces in both of the big political parties are the ones who have brought us all the troubles we have today. While they use desperate and often unethical methods to cling on to power, their days are numbered. It is time to make way for the energy of these new candidates. In the words of Mamdani’s reply to an attack by former Governor Cuomo, “What I don’t have in experience, I make up for in integrity. And what you lack in integrity, you could never make up for with experience.”

In closing, back to Amherst, and a memory from Fort River School in the 1990s, when our son was a student there: every time their parents voted in presidential elections, Amherst elementary school students held their own mock elections. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the results showed their views both mirroring those of their parents and going beyond them. While the adults voted overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party candidate in some of the highest percentages of any town in the state, the young people voted for the Democratic candidates as well, but also for the Green Party, in far greater numbers than did their parents.

I don’t seek to dismiss older candidates or incumbents who have experience and independence, but I do believe that it is time to break the current stranglehold on our town government. The children of the 1990s are the new candidates of today, parents themselves with their own children in the schools. They have a wealth of experience to offer. They pledge to work for “more community engagement, stronger schools with the budgets they deserve, and leadership that centers the needs of our most marginalized neighbors” and to “listening, learning, and acting together—to build an Amherst where everyone thrives.” I welcome their integrity and commitment, and am honored to lend them my support.

I’m voting the Amherst for the People Slate.

Josna Rege is a resident of Amherst and an editor at the Amherst Indy.