I am delighted to have been referenced in Alderman Salvio’s letter to the editor, posted below, and to have a chance to respond.
Alderman Salvio and I have exchanged emails on a past column of mine; I found the exchange engaging, and Alderman Salvio himself to be friendly and pleasant, in person. In addition, I’ve watched Alderman Salvio in action at the council meetings I’ve been to, and read several of his letters to the editor over the past several months.
Here's my reply to this one.
I readily admit, as I admitted in my column, that I am a resident of Plainville and not New Britain – thus, I'm not a New Britain voter or taxpayer and have no claim on a particular alderman’s attentions. This makes it all the more fascinating to me that New Britain aldermen and women have been willing to address each of my questions promptly and thoroughly. (I mention this near the end of my column, making no distinction between parties, and I make no distinction here.)
The implied question of my fitness-to-judge – buried in the statement that I go to “the occasional council meeting,” which is true – is a relevant one, or would have been if I had been making a point particular to the meetings of May 30 or June 5, neither of which I attended. (I did attend the full council meeting of May 28, following which I wrote last week's column.)
As it is, I think Alderman Salvio’s letter to the editor coincides rather well with my characterization of the Republican aldermen as firebrand minority voices. His oppositional tone, not out of place in politics or in a politically motivated letter to the editor, fits my experience of the three or four council meetings I’ve been to, confirming that my experience was no fluke.
Alderman Salvio’s response also makes clear the depth of the divisions between the two Republican aldermen and mayor, and the Democratic aldermen (and alderwomen). His letter agrees tacitly with my suggestion that the Republican aldermen are a put-upon minority voice, rising above the fray to speak truth to power.
He does not, however, complicate his argument by citing the fact that I wrote this in my column.
This makes sense to me, as Alderman Salvio’s main point does not appear to have been to respond to me or my column, but to inform voters – in an entertaining, albeit incendiary way – of how several particular meetings and votes went over the course of the last two months. Including my complete message would have distorted his purpose.
But here is a reiteration of my complete message, anyway, clarified in response to Alderman Salvio’s letter.
I actually have a rather multifaceted view of New Britain’s Common Council. I never claimed perfection for one side or the other. (I wouldn't claim perfection for superheroes: Even Superman is not without a certain dark side -- imagine his x-ray vision or super strength used for evil purposes!)
I did not claim that Democrats do not disparage their Republican colleagues; I claimed that when they did so, it was in polite, politic ways. “Polite” and “politic,” of course, are relative and open to interpretation, and a person – especially, perhaps, a politician – can say impolite things in a civil tone. It has been my experience of New Britain Common Council’s Democrats in general, even in the case of Majority Leader Michael Trueworthy’s accusations of mismanagement in the full council meeting I attended a few weeks ago, that they tend to speak civilly to one another and to Republicans. On the other extreme, although I did not attend the meeting in question, there were references in the full council meeting to Alderman Salvio having told Alderman Sherwood, a Democrat, to “rot in hell” the previous week – a rude thing to say by any standard.
But this is what makes the meetings entertaining. The extremity of the views and how obviously council members care about their positions make this not only good politics, but also captivating to watch.
As captivating, I would say (and have said), as an action movie.
Superheroes are, of course, caricatures. My characterizations of both the Democrats on the council and the Republicans were also exaggerated. I do not believe that Democrats should come to council meetings dressed in Spandex and capes, or use their laser vision to cow their foes – or even that they’re always right in their positions or evaluations, or preternaturally polite. Similarly, I don’t believe that Republicans are the God-chosen Davids designated to fell Goliath-like Democrats. I took pains in my column to positively portray both sides of the aisle because my point was not to make a political endorsement.
My point, of course, was that more people should go to more Common Council meetings.
Too many people see local politics as irrelevant, when local politics are the most relevant. As a friend recently pointed out to me, “that’s where your vote counts most.” Decisions affecting our cities and our lives get made at these meetings. That has to concern us.
I'm sure Alderman Salvio would agree with me there.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment