11.21.2008

D.C. Council's Pretend Rules

In case you missed it, on Nov. 4 we also had some local elections. Longtime D.C. Councilmember Carol Schwartz (R-At Large) lost her bid in the primary and ran as an independent. She lost in the general election, and Michael Brown was elected. Brown, a lifelong Democrat and outspoken supporter of Barack Obama, was running as an independent.

There's no question that Michael Brown is a Democrat. His father was Ron Brown, Secretary of Commerce under Bill Clinton and former Chairman of the DNC. You may recall Ron Brown died in Croatia on a trade mission when his plane crashed.

Anyhow, so Michael Brown, a lobbiest who has run for the D.C. Council and Mayor in the past, pretends to be an independent. Why? Beacuse there's this rule that says no more than 3 of the Council's at-large seats can be held by the same political party. There's already three Democrats and one Independent on the Council, so Brown could not run as a Democrat.

Now the D.C. Republican Party is suing, saying Brown can't take office because he's really a Democrat.

Now I don't even know where to start with this circus. I'll start off by saying I didn't vote for Brown, and for the first time in my life actually voted for a Republican, Patrick Mara. But that's neither here nor there.

I can tell you one thing, the D.C. GOP will not be successful, and Michael Brown will take office. Gonna happen.

The voters spoke and picked Brown... so we either have to go with that, or say the law trumps that and have a special election where only "real" Independents or Republicans can run. What's the litmus test for a real Independent? Brown is clearly a Democrat at heart... but on paper he is no longer a memeber of the Democratic Party. The law uses the term "affliation," not "registered member." Brown voted in the Democratic primary this past February, and then switched to Independent a few months later.

So how about this stupid rule? Should it stand? Should rules be used to try and prop up a minority party? Can we please have a law that says no more than 60% of the Council can be Democrats, and no more than 0% can be Marion Barry?

12 comments:

  1. I am excited about this new format, with many different bloggers posting their views on DC. One request from the peanut gallery... can you all work on your spelling? Lobbyist not "lobbiest." Affiliation not "affliation." HRH King Friday misspells names frequently... It is Eleanor Holmes Norton, not "Eleanore." Bill O'Reilly not "O’Riley." Maybe my preoccupation with spelling makes me a DC loser, but when you can't spell, it makes me doubt whether I should be caring about your opinions at all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. OH SHIT

    I WAS HOPING

    NO. I WAS PRAYING

    I WAS HOPING AND PRAYING THAT THIS MOST RECENT POST WAS POSTED UP BY "JUSTASMALLTOWNGIRL"

    SO I COULD TELL HER TO LEAVE MY CITY AND GO THE FUCK BACK TO HER SMALL TOWN

    OH WELL

    I GUESS THERE ALWAYS IS NEXT TIME

    ReplyDelete
  3. Shit I totally didn't spell check and I even misspelled "Because" once.

    Fixed.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As much as I support efforts to restrict two-party and one-party dominance in politics, that rule seems a bit absurd to me and counter to the will of the electorate.

    How would you determine someone's true motives? You could have a liberal masquerading as a republican, for example. How would you truly know the motivation, even with the developing science of brain scans?

    It's like hate crimes law. I think that if you murder somebody you should generally get the same punishment as someone who, let's say, committed first-degree murder against a person of the same race. I mean, why let the guy off with less time just because he killed another white guy? That doesn't make sense to me.

    I say, let Brownie serve. The voters spoke.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Michael Brown is a shady nitwit, but you don't overturn the results of an election because you have proof that he's a "Democrat at heart."

    The whole "affirmative action for non-Democrat Party machine types" is stupid anyway.

    Who knew there was a DC GOP? And they've got someone who can file legal papers to boot.

    Whatever, DC is effed up, and removing Brownie will serve no purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Remove all the brownies and replace them with whiteys.






    Works for me.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. The voter's voice should prevail. They picked Michael Brown.
    But if Brown aligns himself with the following council members: Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), Kwame Brown (D-At Large), Harry Thomas Jr. (D-Ward 5), Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7) and council Chairman Vincent Gray (D) -- all of whom, except from Kwame Brown, have endorsed Michael Brown with maybe Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), this would be a majority against Fenty with guess who (Barry) as their leader. This a very real possibility.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree with M@, and I'm one of the few, the proud, the DC Republicans. As such, I've actually looked at the statistics of republicans to democrats in the city and it's (obviously) overwhelming democrats (for example, 3000 some people voted for McCain out of every person in DC who voted). Thus, having republicans or even actual independents would not be a reflection of the population at all.

    ReplyDelete
  9. KILL EM' ALL

    LET GOD SORT EM' OUT

    ReplyDelete
  10. anal rape, no lubeNovember 22, 2008

    If I get busted for anally raping little M@ttie, I'll just end up doing time with a bunch of fellas who, unlike my bitch, don't mind being anally raped. Its a win-win for me, my prison mates, AND my fifth limb.

    (M@ttie, I'm gonna scream horrific things in your ear while I'm fucking you. )

    ReplyDelete
  11. ALC, and I'm gonna keep misspelling names because that's how I roll. I like to keep it real like that. O guess I just don't take this blog as seriously as you do. It's flattering that you do, though. Nobody's ever cared about MY opinions... unless they're trying to get in my pants or something.

    ReplyDelete
  12. DONT GET MAD

    NUKE THE BASTARDS

    ReplyDelete