A little over a year ago, I went from being blissfully naive about city
government and politics to being the bitterist, most cynical voter around.
I made that trip so fast that I nearly got the bends. But extended
cynicism isn't really much fun. We have new candidates this year for mayor
and city council who _appear_ to represent a change. I would dearly love
to give up my cynical ways and embrace these candidates enthusiastically,
but I can't support anyone without a certain amount of forboding.
Back last summer, Barbara Nelson wrote: "For example, we could clear the
deck re the city council, but that would not change the incentivess/rewards
that drive the choices they make. It's rather like playing musical chairs
on the Titanic."
Our list manager doesn't want us to use the word "corruption" regarding
city government. I'm thinking of corruption in the sense of decay or
decomposition. People run for public office believing that they are doing
good for their communities. They end up eager to arrange their own
affordable housing like Jackie Cherryhomes or circumvent the legal process
like Joe Biernat. Is it simply money that causes this? I don't know, and
I'll bet most others don't know either. As long as we don't understand how
and why this corruption (decay, decomposition) occurs, I am skeptical about
our chances of getting a better city government.
Rosalind Nelson
Bancroft
At 06:44 PM 6/7/01 -0700, timothy connolly wrote:
>
>I am skeptical of all the announced candidates. I
>don't see any of them swimming against the current.
>
>I am hopeful. It is the well I drink from every day.
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
