Omerta
Dear Blood Brothers:
I’ve puzzled over the behavior of DC politicians, and tried to
understand it. They don’t like each other, don’t trust each other, and
don’t cooperate with each other, yet they support each other when it
comes to the scandals that have engulfed our politics. They don’t speak
badly of each other. I’ve tried to explain that behavior by their all
belonging to one political party, by being all Democrats — in DC, the
political “independents” are really Democrats, too, and the Republicans,
at least on social issues, take positions that are to the left of the
national Democratic party.
But that explanation hasn’t been satisfying to me. It doesn’t fully
explain why politicians wouldn’t call out each others’ corruption. If
they wouldn’t speak in the public interest, at least they could call out
each other to advance their own self-interests. But in the past few
days, I’ve been thinking about another gang that dislikes and distrusts
each other, but is held together by a code of mutual protection. That’s
the Mafia, and it has a code that protects its members, the code of
omerta. Its members don’t appeal to the authorities to get justice or to
expose wrongdoing. They enforce their own rules, and get a rough form of
justice by avenging their grudges without any appeal to society’s laws.
In its American form, omerta has been promoted by drug dealers and
rappers as the “stop snitchin’” movement. Whenever criminal acts are
committed, whatever they are, the code says its dishonorable to snitch
to the police; don’t tell the authorities who committed the crimes.
What could explain more easily the behavior of DC politicians? They
have to know about the misbehavior of their colleagues, yet they don’t
inform the authorities about it. They don’t tell their stories to the
FBI, or the DC Attorney General, or the US Attorney. They don’t inform.
They’re not snitchers. They keep to their code of silence, and openly
praise each other while they privately hold each other in contempt. It’s
the code.
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Michael A. Brown — Down for the Count?
Dorothy Brizill,
dorothy@dcwatch.com
On Monday, August 20, Gary and I filed a challenge and complaint
regarding the nominating petitions that At-large Councilmember Michael
A. Brown submitted to the DC Board of Elections (BOE) reading his
candidacy for reelection and placement on the November 6 ballot. David
Grosso, another candidate running in the race for at-large Councilmember,
also filed a challenge to the signatures on Brown’s petitions.
In keeping with BOE procedures and practices, a prehearing with the
parties in the case (i.e., Michael Brown and the challengers)
will be convened by the Board’s General Counsel on Wednesday, August 29.
All issues that cannot be resolved at the prehearing will be referred to
a full formal hearing before the Board of Elections.
In accordance with District law, the Board must determine the
validity of the challenge by September 10, within twenty days after the
challenge was filed. September 13 will be the deadline for either the
challenger or Michael Brown to appeal the Board’s decision to the DC
Court of Appeals for review (see DC Code 1-1001.08(o)(2), 1-1021-01; 3
DCMR 1906.7, 1506.7, 1506,15, 1609.7, and 1609.15).
A copy of the cover letter that encompassed our challenges and
complaint is at
http://www.dcwatch.com/election2012/brown120820.htm
###############
Will Ivy City Lawsuit Change How the DC
Government Works with ANCs?
David Bosserman,
orilla@comcast.net
A planned upgrade of Union Station forces “temporary” relocation of
commercial bus layover parking. DC is choosing to park them in Ivy City
on the property of the historic Alexander Crummell School. DC already
uses Ivy City as a parking lot for many large government vehicles. See
the Washington Post article for more:
http://tinyurl.com/IvyCityPost
Johnny Barnes filed a lawsuit for Empower DC against this imposition
by DC on this tiny DC neighborhood. The lawsuit has three thrusts: that
DC ignored its legal responsibilities to the Ivy City Advisory
Neighborhood, that DC ignored its environmental impact responsibilities,
and that DC ignored its many agreements with Ivy City to restore the
school for community uses. The lawsuit details how DC did not give the
Ivy City ANC the required “Special Notice” before launching the plan and
that it did not afford “Special Weight” to the ANC’s unanimous vote
against parking the busses there after the plan became public. The
lawsuit shows DC made no environmental impact analysis or statement even
though hundreds of busses will lumber through Ivy city each day belching
diesel fumes and particles. In addition, the lawsuit claims “Breach of
Contract” based upon the long list of public agreements to repair the
historic Alexander Crummell School to meet community needs.
This legal action brings up once more how the DC government handles
notice to and advice from Advisory Neighborhood Commissions. Empower DC
is preparing a draft resolution for ANCs and citizen groups to support
this lawsuit. For more information or to offer support contact Parisa
Norouzi, Executive Director Empower DC, at 234-9119 x 100 or parisa@empowerdc.org.
Attorney Barnes says: “These, in my view, are profound and important
issues, issues that if resolved in our favor will reshape the landscape
of citizen protection and involvement in planning and development in the
District of Columbia. Conversely, if resolved against us could set
precedents that will make it more difficult for citizens to be heard and
listened to. This is a time for relevant groups to stand up and step
forward.” Documents from the Ivy City lawsuit are now available for
review on Attorney Barnes’ web site:
http://www.livingwiththelaw.com/index.php?page=news-2
###############
People who read my blog know that I am a fan of the “Growth Machine”
thesis from urban sociology, which posits that despite seeming
intra-elite competition, for the most part, local economic and political
elites are united around a pro-growth agenda centered upon real estate
development and land use intensification. (The theory was first posited
by Harvey Molotch in a journal article in 1976; there is a link on my
blog,
http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/).
The political scientists have a competing thesis called “urban regime
theory.” Generally, I think UR theory isn’t that great at explaining
anything beyond the local economic development agenda, although the
various proponents of the theory try hard to explain other events. Where
the theory is superior and therefore complementary to GM theory is in
its explanation of how the Growth Machine operates. UR theorists focus
on governance and how governance is a process of sustained effort over
long periods of time and therefore agenda setting is key and that rather
than considering issues separately, it makes more sense to consider
governance as a series of decisions and actions. The key elements to be
studied in an urban regime are the how the governing coalition is
created and organized, their agenda, the resources they organize and
bring to the table, and the system of cooperation.
This relates to your point [themail, August 19] about organizing and
petitions. Being able to create and manage a sustained and ultimately
successful effort indicates whether or not you can be successful in
other community organizing and political endeavors. I happen to agree
with your point, but think that from a meta perspective, GM and UR
theories are useful for people in terms of thinking about local politics
and governance in a systematic manner.
###############
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.
