Alan, IF Mr. Biernat was a regular citizen working at Mills Fleet Farm and struggling to make a living wage like the rest of us. . .I would entirely agree with your minimization of the crime and the desire to have less laws governing personal behavior. It would be awful if it became a crime to shovel a neighbors walk, or to bring over a plate of cookies.
But Mr. Beirnet is not a regular citizen, he is an elected official. As with that job, which he chose to run for, comes some basic responsibilities to uphold the integrity of the democratic process. For year's democracy advocates pushing for clean, fair, open elections in the United States have identified the back slapping, quid-pro-quo culture of politics when mixed with money as ripe with and for corruption. In my eyes it is corruption to take "free" service or products as a public official whether it is a $25 dollar nosebleed ticket at the Target Center, a $2,700 plumbing job, or a $10,000 payment on student loans. In my eyes corruption is a Council member taking $25,000 whether or not the promised lobby on behalf of the business is actually carried out; it is corruption to close a big deal for a developer and then less then a year later show up on their payroll whether they work for the MCDA or a neighborhood; or peddling the promise of political access while running for office. They all tarnish a democracy that promises one person -- one vote. (Except in Florida or when overruled by the "Supreme" Court.) If Joe Beirnet paid for his plumbing work -- by all means he should stay and fight the charge. If he didn't pay for his plumbing, no matter how big the bill -- he should show that he has some respect for his constituents, the city, and democracy -- and resign. (unless his father and his father's former employer appointed the members of the jury) Joseph Barisonzi Lyndale, Ward 10 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Alan Shilepsky Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Mpls] Biernat case. Where's the beef? Speaking as one who did not support Joe Biernat for reelection, I have not been overly impressed so far by the seriousness of the charges against Joe Biernat. $2,700 in free services? Let's see, some stores triple the cost of the products they sell. If such a markup prevailed here it would be $900 of service, marked up to retail value of $2,700. $900. Is this in the felony range? (I'm asking. I don't know.) And then the article in the Stribe today talks about mail fraud, because a union official sent a false invoice through the mails. (Memo to padded-billers: use FedEx.) Seems like a stretch to me, like making a robbery a federal case if Tom Thumb robber fled on federal highway I-35. (Hummm. Maybe if US currency is involved in a payoff then it is automatically a federal case. Memo to politicians--take payoffs in liras or fracs.) Anyway, this case, at least as it pertains to Joe Biernat, hasn't seemed too strong. Can they show the appointment to the Examining Board was a quid pro quo? It's probably as likely Joe was pro-union and felt this guy fit the bill for the Board job. Did Joe know anyone was being paid for the work done on his house--or could it have been friends helping friends, or doing each other favors. I know people who help each other out, giving services at cost or for free. For free I helped a friend two days ago explore job postings on the Internet, and I raked my wife's aunt's front yard a couple weeks ago in Superior. I know of people with trucks who plow their neighbors' drives every time it snows. I hate to see the criminalization of friends helping friends (and acquientances). I prefer to presume innocence instead of guilt in an ambigious case. Maybe the feds have more on Joe than I am aware of. But this case seems to be limping. I don't like it when the state has so many laws governing so many facets of our lives that, in effect, all of us are guilty of something or other, so it becomes the perogative of the people in power to decide who they will prosecute and who they will leave alone (for now). Alan Shilepsky Downtown libertarian statement--a country with too many laws is like a country with no laws--in both cases those in power can decide the rules. _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
