The big question was whether Democrat Shreveport
Mayor Adrian Perkins
would throw his hat into the ring for U.S. Senate. His affirmative
announcement doesn’t answer all the questions.
Because behind the question of whether somebody
runs is why. You run only for a reason, the most of trite of which is you want
to win. Even though incumbent Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy has good
polling numbers and lots of dough to fend off any challenger, you can’t win if
you don’t play, and maybe something weird would happen that could allow Perkins
to win.
However, that’s subject to cost-benefit
calculations. Simply, you run if you think you’ll get more out of it than what
it costs you, politically. Part of the benefits come from winning, but tempered
by your expectancy of victory. In Perkins’ case, unless deluded or unquestioningly
taking some very bad advice, he must know his chances aren’t great.
Some of his costs won’t be great. He doesn’t have
to leave his current office to do so, and state Democrats will have motivation
to back him. He allows the party to run a quality candidate – meaning he will
attain at least 40 percent of the vote and has a chance to go as high as 45
percent – backed by sufficient resources to get enough of the base of the party
to the polls hitting the button for him to achieve such numbers and in the
process reminding them why they vote for the party. Major parties must do this
for high-profile offices on a regular basis to remain competitive with any
chance to win such offices over time.
He also brings some peace to state Democrats. Even
as its registered base is majority black, the party has a long history to this day
of wealthy white donors and power brokers calling the shots, to the point that
it has backed only one black candidate ever from start to finish for Senate or
governor. In a sense, Perkins becomes an affirmative action candidate for the
party to tout that it actually does care about and support black candidates for
the most important offices.
But Perkins risks a substantial cost with this run
– reelection in 2022. How a Senate run makes him more vulnerable begins with
his background. A Shreveport native, Perkins first attended West Point and
served in the military. Upon discharge – which qualified him for disability
payments that Perkins describes as service-related on his disclosure
forms
required by law for his mayoral run and service – he obtained a Harvard law
degree. Briefly prior to his running for mayor he worked for a
politically-connected Democrat-friendly law firm, earning at least $25,000 in a
short period from it (and who likely will donate to his campaign).
To that point, Perkins
had next to no political involvement. While registered to vote in Caddo
Parish in 2007, he never did until his own election. His first
public political act, perhaps setting the stage for two-plus years of
controversy, just before leaving law school involved singing a petition
supporting the nomination of Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh,
which he then immediately repudiated.
Then he shows up to run for mayor, without so much
as even having a homestead in Louisiana (he maintains one where once stationed
in Georgia) and claimed residency at his mother’s. Presenting himself as a blank
slate bordered by his Army service amid claims of youthful vigor, openness, and
change, as a black Democrat in a majority-black constituency he cajoled enough
voters to fill his vessel with what they wanted and abandon the black Democrat
incumbent who had overseen Shreveport’s continued decline.
Out of the gate, Perkins immediately made missteps
in executing the duties of his office. Due to apparent cronyism, he caused
the city to spend much more on insurance than necessary. He also tried to bill
the city for campaign-related expenses. Trying to put his own people on a
city board, he
ran afoul of the law. Eventually, the culture
of mistrust he sowed led to voters defeating three city tax renewals.
And he found plenty of opportunities to make
controversial policy decisions. His ham-handed approach to selecting a new
permanent police chief ultimately had him repudiating
the decision made by a panel he created. He backed
the city spending large sums to subsidize a pie-in-the-sky development scheme
that ultimately
the City Council rejected. When Republican Pres. Donald Trump
visited the area in part to hold a political rally, contrary
to federal law Perkins initially wanted to withhold any city first responder assistance
until forced to reverse under public pressure.
More recently, he signed
the city onto a welfare entitlement program paid out of private funds that gives
people a fixed periodic sum on top of, not supplanting, government benefits. He
also issued
a masking order overturned by the judiciary.
In short, he has given plenty of ammunition to
opponents, both on ethics and policy, to use against him not just for a Senate
run, but also for reelection. And this doesn’t even count the most recent
controversy of alleged multiple drunk driving stops over the past weeks supposedly
covered up by city and police officials, reportedly stemming from the
behavioral condition related to his service discharge.
If the multiple DWI stops receive some kind of verification,
that likely ends his political career, not just because it’s bad and illegal behavior,
but also because its coverup would signal corrupt behavior under his watch
involving him, and because it suggests he has mental health issues that lead to
making poor judgments. Neither commends itself to serving in elective office.
Chance are the Cassidy campaign won’t draw upon
this, if any of it actually happened, because there are already plenty of holes
below the waterline before the Perkins campaign even sets sail. But there are political
forces in Shreveport who want to defeat him in 2022, and the Senate campaign
gives them a free shot at publicizing these allegations.
Either this is no more than rumor without basis in
fact, or Perkins somehow he thinks he can keep a lid on the scandal and/or
weather the storm if it were revealed credibly. If the latter, he almost
certainly has miscalculated, because these things have a way of coming out in high-profile
contests.
Maybe Perkins thinks having all his negatives
hashed out now might reduce their potency for 2022, but they might as easily poison
the well earlier and more thoroughly. Or perhaps at a subconscious level he
knows the gig is up in 2022 and so this gives him a chance for more glory and
publicity before becoming a private citizen approaching 40 with essentially no
background in the private sector, paving the way for some kind of future
employment in or around the woeld of politics.
Regardless, Perkins thinks a Senate run now makes
his political prospects better off in the future. He’s more likely to find
disappointment.
No comments:
Post a Comment