Council looked at performance, not race,
Re: “Racism alive and well in D.C. Council,” Oct. 8
Once again, Mr. Jaffe attempts to simplify complex policy decisions by blaming them on absurd and outdated racial politics. Jaffe’s baseless accusations lead one to wonder about his underlying intentions regarding Council members who challenge the mayor over his policies and decisions. Contrary to Mr. Jaffe, the vote against the nomination of Dr. Ximena Hartsock to head the Department of Parks and Recreation was not about race, but rather about the acting director’s experience and tenure. Hartsock terminated successful programs and staff, replaced key personnel, and provided significant pay raises for herself and her transition team during a time of layoffs, budget cuts, and economic recession. Perhaps most alarming was her blatant disregard for laws passed by the Council. Mr. Jaffe conveniently neglected to mention that white Council members Phil Mendelson and Mary Cheh also voted against her. If he is looking for a simple explanation, he should try this on for size: The vote was between members who rubber-stamp the mayor’s agenda and those who believe an independent Council should provide checks and balances for the executive branch. I take personal and professional offense at the assertion that my policy decisions are based on anything other than merit. I challenge Mr. Jaffe to explain my consistent support for the Marriage Equality bill, which has caused considerable concern within segments of the black community. Moreover, his claim that multiple Council members vote along racial lines is not supported by the facts; nearly 90 percent of the votes are unanimous. It’s ironic that Mr. Jaffe is accusing the Council of the very tactic that he is perpetuating, a throwback to the divisive racial politics of the past.
Michael A. Brown
Member at large,
Politics and philanthropy don’t mix
Re: “Feeding at the trough,” Oct. 7
Jonetta Rose Barras’ column concerning the government funding of Washington philanthropy groups struck home. Many years ago, I ceased giving money to any organization that received government funds out of my life-long observation from living in D.C. of the inevitable corruption that ensues from such arrangements. Once a cause, however noble at conception, begins to enter the political realm, politics and special interests slowly take over. Getting government and politicians involved may seem a quick remedy, but in the long run it is a pact with the devil. The main business of politics is politics. Always has been, always will be. It’s the nature of the beast. If we don’t look after ourselves, our family, and our local community, what’s makes anyone believe politicians can or want to do better?
Francois Krodel
Washington
Proposed insurance legislation exploits consumers
The Insurance Claims Consumer Protection Amendment Act of 2009 puts D.C. far outside the national standard and sends up a red flag to families living and working in the District. A bill like this does not serve the interests of individuals in the District, but rather exploits them. More dubious lawsuits mean more litigation costs for insurance companies, who will then be forced to cover these costs of doing business at the expense of the consumer. Frivolous litigation will become big business. Hardworking residents have a right to see their money invested wisely towards improving facilities, buying new equipment, and hiring skilled employees – not covering corporate litigation costs. The only thing that this bill assures is the destruction of that right. No state permits such egregious cost-shifting. D.C. should not be the first.
Jessica Sigler
McLean
