Cosmetologists, Cosmeticians, and Aestheticians
Dear Beauties:
The city council comes back into session on Tuesday. Councilmembers
have had all summer to decide what they want to do about the plague of
scandals that has descended on city government. Tomorrow, and over the
coming month, they will be introducing their legislative proposals to
reform the practices of the council that have brought it into disgrace.
Having learned nothing, they will try to pass many of their proposals
through the city council without public hearings or public input, and
with restricted notice to the general public. Now their constituents
will have all fall and winter to judge whether those proposals are
serious, whether they can be enforced, and whether they will do enough
to address the government’s shortcomings.
Or, as is more likely, are the proposals that will be advanced by
councilmembers too little, too late, too vague, and too unenforceable?
Will these proposed laws close a few minor loopholes that exist in rules
about lobbying, constituent service funds, earmarks, and so on, while
leaving larger loopholes open and creating new ones? Are they genuine
efforts to clean up government, or are they merely cosmetic attempts to
improve appearances, while leaving the real corruption untouched? No
councilmember — not one — has distinguished himself or herself in
this crisis as a champion of good, clean government, as a leader.
Instead, they have offered their services as cosmeticians, eager to put
lipstick on the pig, to tie bows on it, to slap a little paint on it.
Councilmembers try to excuse themselves by saying that they are just
one person in a council of thirteen, that their hands are tried and that
they are unable to do anything without the support of their colleagues.
But Councilmember Mary Cheh bragged in a talk to the DC Environmental
Network just this month that she can get legislation passed easily,
“‘The other members of the council, they might not be interested. .
. . They kind of roll their eyes at some of the stuff I’ve put
through,’ she said. ‘But nevertheless, when I explain it to them, I
usually can get their support.’ Cheh noted that the barriers to
legislation are lower in the District than virtually anywhere else in
the nation. ‘If I get six other people to agree with me,’ she said,
‘I can pass a law, and we can lead the country,’” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yxvf5wWLVs,
as quoted by Mike DeBonis, http://tinyurl.com/3m75apj).
So, with all the eye-rolling, stupid bills that Mary Cheh has been able
to get past her skeptical colleagues, what’s the problem that makes it
so difficult for real ethics legislation to get passed? Is there a
supermajority on the city council that wants to preserve corruption and
opportunities for cheating? And if there is, why would we want to
preserve those councilmembers in office?
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Ethics Reform Scorecard
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com
Despite the culture of corruption that appears to be so pervasive in
the District’s government, DC’s elected officials are using every
opportunity to say publicly that they support “ethics” and “ethics
reform.” The elected officials were joined last Thursday by DC
Attorney General Irvin Nathan, who was the principal speaker at the
monthly meeting of the Ward 3 Democrats. Nathan discussed his officer’s
ongoing review of the District’s ethics laws and procedures. Nathan
indicated that, on behalf of the Gray administration, he would be making
recommendations regarding ethics reform that had five key components —
vigorous enforcement, coordination among government agencies,
confidentiality, accountability, and “sanctions with teeth.”
At the meeting, the Ward 3 Democratic Committee passed a resolution
(by a close vote of 18-16) calling on the council to adopt an ethics
bill that includes a “comprehensive code of conduct,” a prohibition
against outside employment, and the elimination of constituent services
funds, http://www.dcwatch.com/issues/ethics110915.htm.
And this Thursday, the DC Democratic State Committee is scheduled to
hear a report from a special ethics reform committee that has been
working through the summer on the issue.
In the coming week, a plethora of ethics reform bills will be likely
to be introduced at the council’s first legislative session after the
summer recess. Councilmember Tommy Wells will be introducing a bill or
bills to prohibit political contributions from lobbyists, bar elected
officials from receiving free legal representation, reform constituent
services funds, and limit independent campaign expenditures. In
addition, at Tuesday’s legislative session, Vincent Orange will try to
move “The Ethics and Accountability Act of 2011” as emergency
legislation. The legislation would create a Committee on Ethics and
Accountability within the District government “to ensure the
professional and financial integrity of Elected Officials.” The
members of the committee would include the chairman of the Board of
Elections and Ethics, the Director of the Office of Campaign Finance,
the Attorney General, the Inspector General, the Auditor, and the Chief
Financial Officer. It would “provide ethical guidance, have
investigative authority, subpoena power, and the power to impose
penalties and make referrals for civil or criminal investigations; to
establish a Code of Ethics; to establish an Elected Official Annual
Certification; to amend the District of Columbia Campaign Finance Reform
and Conflict of Interest Act to require rolling publication of lobbyist
registration, to add disclosure of business relationships between
lobbyists and public officials; to prohibit the use of the official
position to obtain financial gain for a non-for-profit entity with which
he or she is affiliated, to add additional financial disclosure
requirements, and to require disclosure of external fundraising
activities; and to amend the District of Columbia Comprehensive Merit
Personnel Act to require that new District employees receive an ethics
manual and ethics training, and that employees receive biannual ethics
training.”
Moreover, Council Chairman Kwame Brown and Ward 3 Councilmember Mary
Cheh have also suggested that they are drafting ethics reform bills. As
Betty Davis said, “Fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy
ride,” over the next few months in the District government.”
###############
Yvette Alexander and Betty Noel
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com
In 2012, residents of Ward 7 will elect their councilmember.
Dissatisfaction with Yvette Alexander, the current councilmember, is so
widespread that four individuals, William Bennett, Tom Brown, Kevin B.
Chavous, and Ron Moten, have already filed campaign committees and
intend to challenge Alexander. Moreover, in recent months, citizens and
civic leaders throughout the ward have been meeting to identify an
alternate candidate and to share their frustrations about the quality of
representation Alexander has provided Ward 7 since she was first elected
in a special election in 2007 to succeed Vincent Gray. With the ward
suffering from crime and the lack of economic development, the breaking
point for many Ward 7 residents came this past spring, during the
council’s redistricting process. Alexander, rather than negotiation
with her council colleagues to redraw the ward’s boundaries to include
the eastern portion of Capitol Hill, instead willingly accepted the
inclusion of what Ward 7 residents included less than desirable real
estate — namely, the DC Jail, DC General Hospital, and Congressional
Cemetery.
In recent months, Alexander’s handling of the nomination of
Elizabeth “Betty” Noel to the Public Service Commission (PSC)
reinforced the belief that she does not act to serve the needs of Ward 7
residents. Noel is the District’s former People’s Counsel
(1991-2010). Over her twenty-year career working in the Office of the
People’s Counsel, Noel had earned a reputation as a strong consumer
advocate. Prior to the Council’s summer recess, Mayor Gray nominated
her to fill a vacancy on the three-member PSC, which regulates utilities
in the District. However, since July, Alexander has refused to meet with
Noel or schedule a confirmation hearing for her before her Committee on
Public Services and Consumer Affairs. Instead, Alexander appears to have
aligned herself with PEPCO, which is lobbying against Noel, claiming
that “her work experience [as People’s Council] creates an
irreconcilable conflict of interest,” http://tinyurl.com/3wjujos.
Within the District of Columbia, residents of Wards 4 and 7 have
endured the most hardship when there are electric power outages in the
city. PEPCO is the utility that successfully lobbied Mayor Adrian Fenty
to replace Noel as People’s Counsel in 2010. Both Verizon and
Washington Gas have refused to join in PEPCO’s current effort to lobby
against Noel’s appointment to the Public Service Commission. Gray’s
naming of Noel rates as one of his best appointments to date. Given Noel’s
history and advocacy for consumers, it is astonishing that Alexander
would not enthusiastically support her appointment.
###############
Ward 3 Democrats Say No to Mary-Laundering and
Pay-to-Cheh
Frank Winstead, A Ward 3 Democrat, frank.winstead@gmail.com
Thursday night, the Ward 3 Democratic Committee passed a resolution
on the need for DC council ethics reform. The Ward 3 Dems even called
for the elimination of councilmember constituent service funds. Just a
few weeks ago these very same Ward 3 Dems were exposed as having
received $500 that had been “Mary-laundered” through the Ward 3
councilmember’s constituent service fund. In addition, the Ward 3 Dems
want to extend the no-outside employment rules that cover the mayor and
the council chairman to all councilmembers. No more “Pay-to-Cheh”
from George Washington University if the councilmember really wants to
respect her constituents’ wishes. The vote was close. It was so close
that a roll call was e held. I recognized many of the absentees’ names
as being former friends of Cheh and a few as current hangers-on. If Mary
Cheh and just one of her eligible voter-cronies had shown up, I would
not be writing about this rare victory for honest government in DC.
###############
Important Victory
Ilir Zherka, DC Vote, info@dcvote.org
The DC Democracy movement claimed a small but important victory
Wednesday night. There were no anti-democracy riders added onto the
District’s budget during the Senate Appropriations Committee markup.
So far this year there has only been one rider successfully added onto
DC’s budget. Our movement has been taking aggressive steps to defend
democracy in DC and educate people on Capitol Hill and around the
country about these anti-democracy riders. All year we have been pushing
back towards both opponents and allies and this past week was no
exception.
With support from the pro-choice community and a coalition of close
to one hundred organizations, we launched an aggressive call-in campaign
and met with Senate offices on the Hill. These actions, in combination
with the leadership of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton and Mayor
Gray, led to a DC budget free of harmful riders in the Senate
Appropriations Committee. We are not out of the woods yet. Some members
of Congress will continue to attack DC by adding anti-democracy riders
on the short term Continuing Resolution (the federal budget bill) which
is expected to be voted on next week.
Our work is not finished. We are inspired by the civil rights
movement and the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. who said, “the
arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” DC’s
day will come. Let’s keep fighting!
###############
Washington Post
Outlook Section on Twitter
Phil Shapiro, pshapiro@his.com
Noticed that the Washington Post Outlook section on Twitter
has grown to have 680 followers, including several Washington Post
reporters and editors, as well as a locksmithing service from Nevada, a
Massachusetts state representative and a locksmithing service from
Arizona. See https://twitter.com/#!/WashPostOutlook
###############
Commissioner McKay gives good grounds for applying the DC law
reasonably as to redistricting Single Member Districts (SMD’s) of
Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners [themail, September 24]. The law
allows reasonable application. Compactness of SMD’s and respect for
real neighborhood ties promotes effective representation of
constituents. A rigid striving for uniformity of population (as
estimated by the US Census) can invite strange SMD boundaries, bordering
on gerrymanders.
That’s a problem we ran into ten years ago when I was an ANC
commissioner serving on a committee to advise my Ward Councilmember
about ANC redistricting in our Ward. Then, too, we had to overcome
unwise demands for uniformity. The end result, then, made use of the
flexibility that DC law allows and focused on essential values, as DC
law encourages.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
Ward Five Council on Education, September 20,
29
Raenelle Zapata, ward5coe@yahoo.com
Interested in improving our schools? Join the Ward Five Council on
Education at our meetings on Tuesday, September 20, 6:30 p.m.-8:00 p.m.,
at Lamond-Riggs Library, 5401 South Dakota Avenue, NE, and on Thursday,
September 29, 5:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m., at Luke C. Moore High School, 1001
Monroe Street, NE, with Mark Jones, State School Board Representative.
###############
themail@dcwatch is an E-mail discussion forum that is published every
Wednesday and Sunday. To change the E-mail address for your subscription
to themail, use the Update Profile/Email address link below in the
E-mail edition. To unsubscribe, use the Safe Unsubscribe link in the
E-mail edition. An archive of all past issues is available at http://www.dcwatch.com/themail.
All postings should be submitted to themail@dcwatch.com, and should
be about life, government, or politics in the District of Columbia in
one way or another. All postings must be signed in order to be printed,
and messages should be reasonably short — one or two brief paragraphs
would be ideal — so that as many messages as possible can be put into
each mailing.
