Letters

Democratic caucuses

Dean is Democrats’ best chance to win

The Democratic Party is on a nasty losing streak. It lost control of the Congress on 1994, the presidency in 2000, and the Senate in 2002. Its only bright spot on the electoral front in more than a decade has been the re-election of an incumbent president, in 1996.

Now the Democrats face the difficult task of uprooting an incumbent president. The Republicans know very well how to defeat a standard-issue liberal Democrat like John Kerry, as their winning record over the last decade shows. They will attack his mediocre legislative record, his gun-control advocacy, his financial ties to special interests, his personal shortcomings, even his liberalness. And if recent history is any indication, they will win.

Since Kerry emerged as the front-runner for the nomination, conservative pundits have begun to admit that Howard Dean is the one they fear. And for good reason. The former Vermont governor has a record of success and leadership on all the main issues of concern to Americans, from health care to job creation to national security. For 12 years, he stood firmly by his principles as a fiscal conservative and social progressive. And his view that gun control should be left to the states gained him the NRA’s highest rating. Consequently, unlike Kerry, Dean can attack the Republicans from their right flank. That worries them.

In Dean, Democrats have a rare opportunity to nominate a courageous and effective leader. More importantly, they finally have a chance to pick a winner.

DREW POULIN

Edmonds

Dean stands up to special interests

Democracy’s future – and that of the Democratic Party – is on the line Feb 7.

In the early ’70s, people I went to college with became activists and Democrats. Many went into lifelong public service.

The same people in college now seem to be turning off to politics or towards the Green Party or an “independent” status.

From calling precincts and campaigning, our party seems to be aging. People under 45 don’t seem to be as common as people over 50. What happened?

In the ’80s and ’90s we moved away from the grassroots campaigning that elected FDR and Kennedy in favor of mass marketing through polling, TV, phone banking and direct mail. It grew impossible to depend on small donations, and necessary to move towards larger and larger PAC contributors. As this progressed, the connection between American neighborhoods and politicians thinned.

It is no wonder that national policy is now virtually made by special interest groups.

The Dean phenomenon results from the urgency many young (and not-so-young) people feel to overthrow this paradigm.

Fortunately we have at least one candidate who sees clearly that leaders must have courage to speak the truth when it is hard.

Unfortunately, the remora parasitism that has become attached to the political system has more power over all of us than we may be aware of.

The virulence of the attacks from all the vested interests, when the public moves towards someone like Dean, rise in proportion to any prospect for a real alternative. They shoot to kill.

We should oppose this when we get the chance, by supporting candidates like Dean who have the courage to stand up to it. If we don’t there will be fewer and fewer in the future.

For caucus information, see:

http://www.Snohomish4Dean.us

STUART HEADY

Edmonds

Edmonds

City needs to clarify building regulations

It is evident that the City Council needs to act to clarify the city’s building code. The ambiguity about building height limitation and modulation has caused a volunteer member of the Architectural Design Board to recently resign, Mayor Haakenson to last year and again last week appeal for clarification, and the city to be replete with citizens who are also highly frustrated with this issue.

Council President Plunkett apparently has said that “no Council member had yet expressed to him a desire to move the issue to the top of the body’s priority list.” Since the code ambiguity typically causes resolution of permit applications in favor of builders, citizens can only conclude that Mr. Plunkett, and very likely some other Council members, are not moving to correct the code because that’s simply the way they want it. Well, that’s just not acceptable! Start showing some leadership, Mr. Plunkett.

RON WAMBOLT

Edmonds

Let’s see if Council member can deliver

Golly, gee whiz, January isn’t yet over, however we already have the probable “whopper of the year.”

“I worked on the Peggy Pritchard Olson campaign and yes, Peggy did have some money to work with, but this had nothing to do with her winning the race” (Enterprise letters, Jan. 30).

Excuse me, her huge $16,000 fund (a record?) barely edged a highly effective leader, Lora Petso. Oh yes, she used her name dropping routine often, which helped her a bit.

While it’s still too early to appraise Ms. Olson’s performance fully, my frequent observation thus far has been limited to: her campaign prostitution gaffe and denial of it; her campaign violating our sign ordinance; one politically expedient Council vote which arguably violates her oath of office; and her Council grousing about having to pay her neighbor to trim a hedge for her view.

Not too dynamic to date is it?

Edmonds citizens are certainly willing to give her a chance to show us all the terrific stuff she has to offer, and, indeed, promised. She won fair and square, money or no money, and that is undeniable. But the campaign is over and Ms. Olson needs to call off her contentious campaign supporters with the attitudes, and begin to go to work for the people. The easy part is over; let’s see if she can begin to deliver her promised performance!

RAYMOND J. MARTIN

Edmonds