One week ago today, the voters of Durham went to the polls to choose their mayor. This time, not only were they armed with information from local election guides, but they went there with another thought in mind--that the Democratic National Committee had endorsed challenger Bill Bell against incumbent Nick Tennyson.

In fact, some even went to voting stations because they had received a phone call with the voice of former president Bill Clinton on the other end, urging them to vote--"Bill is a Democrat who will do a great job for the people of Durham." Such partisanship, though a shrewd move by the Democrats, was unwelcome in this year's elections, since neither candidate displayed significant partisan differences in their views.

Both Bell and Tennyson spoke out during the campaign on two key issues--crime and downtown development--but even then their differences were small, as each candidate favored higher police presence in crime-ridden areas. On downtown development, the one notable difference was public support; although Tennyson supported a tax prior to finding private investors in the area, Bell said the tax should never have been levied. This distinction does not fall along party lines and certainly does not seem worthy of a major national political party's influencing the election.

The involvement of the Democratic Party attached a set of labels to both candidates that did not even define them according to the issues. The $25,000 that poured into the election only facilitated the message that Bell was a Democratic candidate, and it likely caused some voters to go to the polls without any information outside of party affiliation. Furthermore, the get-out-the-vote efforts--while valuable--were targeted only toward one particular group of voters. Straight-line party voting occurs in other, larger elections, and this election likely saw the same phenomenon.

The entry of the DNC signals a change in Durham politics--one that the Republican Party should have picked up on earlier. As the city grows, more issues--such as environmental concerns given growth and development--will become partisan. And in elections where such issues dominate, political parties have more reason to help delineate between candidates. Not only do political parties help voters make informed decisions by closely examining each candidate, but they bring residents who normally would not vote out to the polls; as long as both parties are engaged in these efforts, they are valuable to everyone.

So although partisanship was not warranted in this year's city elections, it appears to now be in the future. And as long as Durham primaries remain non-partisan--allowing for more than two candidates to seek office--such change may increase voter participation while still allowing outsiders to run.