COAST is working within the rules of the city charter. I don't see how following the rules can be classified as mob rule.
It's mob rule because the bigger mob wins.
Still, I don't think it's fair to label COA T as a conservative group and heap everything on them. Smitherman's NAACP has had a huge role in this harassment of our city.
Further, COA T has not followed a strict conservative agenda. If they had, they would be trying to get spending down.
Again, if you don't like the city's referendum process, work to change it.
Pistol hit it right on the head. The amount of bitching and moaning I've heard about this charter amendment has been deafening. If you don't like the charter amendment process given to us by our elected leaders then get off your lazy asses and CHANGE THE PROCESS. If not, please keep your whining to yourself.
You don't get it.
The process is being abused.
We get it ... but you're still whining.
If this were a charter amendment you agreed with, you wouldn't be saying a thing.
(I'm for streetcars, BTW.)
Many citizens of Cincinnati feel they are not represented in city government, the 9X voting is rule by majority in the extreme. A system of wards and at large has proven to bring better goverment to many areas, is Cincinnati too unique? Or is Cincinnati afraid of giving the vote to all citizens?
John,
Everu citizen of Cincinnati has the right to vote under Ohio Law. Every vote is counted. If your candidates are not winning, sorry, but that is how elections work. Not every candidate wins. The problem The ward system is that it will create a more balkinized city, where councilmembera will only care about what affects their ward directly.
Most U.S. cities use a ward system of some sort.
To use Griff's own words (almost)...
"Every vote is counted (in a referendum.) If your (issues) are not winning, sorry, but that is how elections work. Not every (issue) wins."
Big Money also influences council elections, you know.
WTF, lynch mobs used to be legal. Your argument is kaput.
Quimbob, Smitherman's NAACP is conservative. If he had party affiliation, Smitherman would be a Republican.
Here's the thing. The passenger rail amendment would be pretty inarguably disastrous policy, IF ONLY because it would render Cincinnati ineligible for the federal rail system, which is being paid for by Californians and New Yorkers and Texans. So it's just no-strings-attached free money for Cincinnati, and turning it down would just be stupid.
So, anything that puts that bad policy in the hands of demagogues is bad, especially because Cincinnati lacks a clear, sane method of educating the public on ballot initiatives.
If we had a decent news organization, or a sheriff/prosecutor team that wasn't horrendously corrupt, then perhaps our populace would be able to make an informed decision. But we don't, so they can't.
"The problem the ward system is that it will create a more balkinized city, where councilmembera will only care about what affects their ward directly."
People don't really relate to the wards suggested, either. When we had the ward system, we had 30 or more council members - I have no idea how things got done.
The people pushing these referendums are unelectable and they supported the PR thing because it gave them a slightly better chance to push their fringe ideas.
A lot of the people who don't feel represented have disenfranchised themselves.
Quim, does that mean you like City Council's makeup and think it's doing an effective job?
It is always amazing to see how people will defend something that has not worked effectively for years. Is it that they fear change, or is it because they like the way things work now? Most cities that have a ward/at large council make up are not Balkanized. Most of them are better positioned in the world today than Cincinnati.
John - There was a study performed that showed that that a ward council is better. But the study didn't align with the interests of many who post here, so the study was therefore "flawed". Because it was flawed, the exact opposite conclusion must be reached. Therefore, your scenario must lead to balkanization and other problems. See how this works? Glad to help.
Lynch mobs have never been legal in this country. Ruthless white people with no concern for the law or rights of blacks were allowed to run rampant in some cases due to lax law enforcement. Sometimes the law did try to stand up for righteousness but was overwhelmed. One such crazed riot took place here destroying the courthouse. Do your research next time before making such accusations. The comparison of mob rule to COAST following the laws of our city is offensive and intentionally misleading.
Who did the study, Joe?
I think the primary resistance to wards is that they were the main mechanism of the Cox machine. That's just the pre-coffee argument.
classy post Brian.
WTF says:
...One such crazed riot took place here destroying the courthouse...
The courthouse was destroyed in the 2001 riots? I don't think so. Check your facts please. A lot of crazed people with lots of wanton destruction and unlawfulness, but the courthouse remained intact.
Joe,
That would be the riots of 1884. You can read about it here.
This is getting far afield.
http://www.ngbiwm.com/Exhibits/l...ts/
lynching.htm
"For most of the history of the United States, lynching was rarely prosecuted, and when it was, it was under state murder statutes."
Now, nobody is comparing COAST to a lynch mob--I was just saying that lynch mobs were acting within local ordinances (many of which required premeditation).
However, I find it unlikely that COAST is accurately portraying the certain effects of its charter amendment (namely, to disqualify Cincinnati for federal HSR development). Lying to people about the petition they're signing, while illegal, is rarely prosecuted.
Well, unless you're a liberal. Then you get a show trial the week before an election.
I'll give Miller credit--the guys from COAST sure do know their mobs.
In 2012 we must vote for Governor Sarah Palin to become our President and Governor Mitt Romney to become our Vice President starting on January 20, 2013 , because of Governor Sarah Palin's and Governor Mitt Romney's superior right wing conservative philosophy. Governor Sarah Palin's and Governor Mitt Romney's superior right wing philosophy is shown in that they are pro God and Christianity, pro life, pro marriage; pro guns-second amendment, pro low taxes, pro low government spending; pro small government, pro unintrusive government, pro traditional and Judeo Christian values; pro Bible reading and prayer in our public schools, pro Christians schools and private education , pro private and free enterprise; pro military spending, anti arms agreements with Russia, pro creation; pro nuclear, pro conservative supreme court judges, pro American sovereignty; pro capitalism, anti communist, anti socialist; conservative on immigration, and pro constitution
That's a good plan, Mr. Warren. Then when Palin abruptly quits, there'll be an experienced weasel right behind her to sell out government to large business interests.
With Peter Bronson gone, am I going to be getting an increase in the amount of crazy nut cases posting comments? I'm kinda thinking that Mr. Warren is just a wee bit insane, in the padded room sense. I think even Bronson would find this guy crazy.
Commenting by HaloScan
