Yesterday’s blog post about two local government reform bills being defeated in the Senate was intended (like all communication efforts) to draw attention. After all, comprehensive reform — particularly at the township level — has been a top priority of the Chamber (and the governor) over the last four years.
The attention goal was achieved, at least in part, as there was an interpretation by some (including at least one state senator) that the analogy in the lead was directly comparing the defeat of these two bills to the magnitude of the House Democrat walkout. That was not the intention at all. The reference to the House dispute (one could be justified using much stronger terms) was simply to show that 99% of the media and public attention was focused on the House and that the actions of the Senate (both those we agreed with and did not support) were occurring "under the radar screen."
That’s the great thing about interpretations — everyone has their own. Now, you know mine in authoring this post.