Electile Dysfunction
They like to say about Michigan weather, "If you don't like it, wait five minutes. It'll change."
In Detroit, if you don't like the mayor, wait five minutes. Because HE'S likely to change.
They're holding elections and primaries in Detroit these days as if the city clerk is being paid by the leaflet.
They should install a revolving door in the mayor's office in the City County Building downtown. And an ejection seat behind the desk.
Disgraced Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick -- and judging by his behavior, I'd say the "disgraced" part is in OUR eyes, not his -- was forced out of office last summer. By charter, the City Council President -- in this case Ken Cockrel Jr. -- takes over.
That's where it gets funky, and where the city's new fetish for bugling people to the polls begins.
Kilpatrick's term officially ends on December 31, 2009. Meaning, that he would have been up for re-election this year, a primary held in August for the November general election.
The city had a choice: let Cockrel finish out Kilpatrick's term -- giving him about a year before an August 2009 primary, or begin holding primaries and elections, chopping up Kilpatrick's remaining 16 months like a Japanese steakhouse chef obliterating a stalk of celery.
Here's what's happening now.
Cockrel is mayor, but almost as soon as he took office, he had to be in re-election mode, because a February primary loomed. This gives way to a May election between the top two vote-getters from the February primary. The winner of the May election has to immediately go into re-election mode, too, because an August primary looms for a November election.
This nonsense set up the possibility that Detroit could have had four mayors in little over a year: Kilpatrick; Cockrel; the winner in May; and the winner in November.
How does this make sense?
Supporters of this flurry of elections say that Cockrel would have had an unfair advantage over his opponents come August '09, having been in office for nearly a year at that point.
Well, tough. That's the way the cookie crumbles. Besides, what if Cockrel had done a poor job? Then he would have been at a disadvantage, having been the bumbling incumbent.
Regardless, the idea, I thought, is for a mayor is to get things done -- which he can hardly do if he's constantly trying to outrun opponents nipping at his heels all the way to the next ballot box.
It's tempting to say that it's just another example of how they do things in Detroit, which isn't a compliment. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt here, but I'm just not seeing where having all these voting dates is in the best interest of the city and its residents.
I would think that after the Kilpatrick debacle, the thing Detroit would want or need the most is some degree of stability, i.e. Cockrel serving out the term and running for re-election in the August 2009 primary, on schedule. Fair and square. What the city SHOULDN'T want is staying in flux any longer than necessary.
The winner this November will, finally, have a full, four-year term with which to work. But by that point, Kilpatrick will have been out of office for about 15 months, which, frankly, are 15 lost months. Cockrel is a good man and is trying, but he truthfully is being hamstrung by constantly having to stump for his job. The Cobo Hall renovation deal is an admirable effort on his part, but so many other things are being put on hold, waiting for Detroit to choose a full-term mayor this November.
They're having too many primaries and elections in Detroit nowadays. They should have gone for quality over quantity.
In Detroit, if you don't like the mayor, wait five minutes. Because HE'S likely to change.
They're holding elections and primaries in Detroit these days as if the city clerk is being paid by the leaflet.
They should install a revolving door in the mayor's office in the City County Building downtown. And an ejection seat behind the desk.
Disgraced Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick -- and judging by his behavior, I'd say the "disgraced" part is in OUR eyes, not his -- was forced out of office last summer. By charter, the City Council President -- in this case Ken Cockrel Jr. -- takes over.
That's where it gets funky, and where the city's new fetish for bugling people to the polls begins.
Kilpatrick's term officially ends on December 31, 2009. Meaning, that he would have been up for re-election this year, a primary held in August for the November general election.
The city had a choice: let Cockrel finish out Kilpatrick's term -- giving him about a year before an August 2009 primary, or begin holding primaries and elections, chopping up Kilpatrick's remaining 16 months like a Japanese steakhouse chef obliterating a stalk of celery.
Here's what's happening now.
Cockrel is mayor, but almost as soon as he took office, he had to be in re-election mode, because a February primary loomed. This gives way to a May election between the top two vote-getters from the February primary. The winner of the May election has to immediately go into re-election mode, too, because an August primary looms for a November election.
This nonsense set up the possibility that Detroit could have had four mayors in little over a year: Kilpatrick; Cockrel; the winner in May; and the winner in November.
How does this make sense?
Supporters of this flurry of elections say that Cockrel would have had an unfair advantage over his opponents come August '09, having been in office for nearly a year at that point.
Well, tough. That's the way the cookie crumbles. Besides, what if Cockrel had done a poor job? Then he would have been at a disadvantage, having been the bumbling incumbent.
Regardless, the idea, I thought, is for a mayor is to get things done -- which he can hardly do if he's constantly trying to outrun opponents nipping at his heels all the way to the next ballot box.
It's tempting to say that it's just another example of how they do things in Detroit, which isn't a compliment. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt here, but I'm just not seeing where having all these voting dates is in the best interest of the city and its residents.
I would think that after the Kilpatrick debacle, the thing Detroit would want or need the most is some degree of stability, i.e. Cockrel serving out the term and running for re-election in the August 2009 primary, on schedule. Fair and square. What the city SHOULDN'T want is staying in flux any longer than necessary.
The winner this November will, finally, have a full, four-year term with which to work. But by that point, Kilpatrick will have been out of office for about 15 months, which, frankly, are 15 lost months. Cockrel is a good man and is trying, but he truthfully is being hamstrung by constantly having to stump for his job. The Cobo Hall renovation deal is an admirable effort on his part, but so many other things are being put on hold, waiting for Detroit to choose a full-term mayor this November.
They're having too many primaries and elections in Detroit nowadays. They should have gone for quality over quantity.
Comments
Post a Comment
As you will...