Schell's Seattle
Four years ago, I fell for the hype and voted for Paul Schell for mayor [see "Schell Shock," 2/15]. I hereby apologize to my fellow Seattle citizens for making that mistake.
The "accomplishments" that Schell brags about? A competent politician could do the same things without even having to stay sober. Some of them, such as synchronizing traffic lights, are items already done by 90 percent of American cities. And as far as the "competence issue" goes—is there anyone out there with a brain who thinks, after the WTO and the New Year's surrender to terrorism, that Schell can handle a snowstorm or an earthquake? Or will he just curl up into a corner and suck his thumb?
But it's more than that. In Paul Schell's Seattle, "world-class" is all-important and "livable" is evil. In Paul Schell's Seattle, protecting circus animals is more important than protecting citizens from parking meters that rip them off. In Paul Schell's Seattle, it's more important to blow $9 million on a glitzy international event than to pave the streets. In Paul Schell's Seattle, Planet Hollywood counts for everything and the Honey Bear Bakery counts for nothing. In short, in Paul Schell's Seattle, you don't count unless you have a suitcase full of cash or a suitcase full of dynamite.
Maybe Schell has us figured out. Maybe he's figured Seattleites are entirely comfortable with the idea of the Emerald City becoming a red-light district for every quick-buck artist from Hong Kong to Los Angeles. But, still, I'm glad that Schell is running again. He's humiliated Seattle—he owes the voters a chance to humiliate him in return. And if Seattleites are stupid enough to re-elect him, then it's a clear sign that Seattle isn't worth saving.
TIMOTHY C. MAHONEY
SEATTLE
Downhill with Paul
As I read the article that Mayor Schell wanted to run for re-election ["Schell Shock," 2/15], I was pretty pissed off. Mayor Schell is a hypocritical man. If he gets back into office, our city will go downhill even more than it already has. If he gets back into office, it is like letting a kid loose in a candy store.
BRITTNY CHALMERS
VIA E-MAIL
Primary stealth
This is a classic case of the public wanting to have its cake and eat it too ["Party poopers," 2/15]. If we insist on partisan (two-party) politics in our state, we should be willing to stick to a process that allows the parties to select their respective candidates. In the schizophrenic politics of this state, we want to be partisan without really being partisan. It won't work, because it allows political organizations to tamper with the primaries of their opponents.
Example: Two well-known Democrats face off in a local primary election in a traditional Democratic District. This situation automatically sets up a split in the Democratic vote. An opportunist Republican decides to file as a Democrat in the primary to take advantage of that split between the two real Democrats. The local Republican Party assists by contacting their organization to see that no more Republicans run in the election, so there will be no primary on the Republican side. Are you still with me?
The Republicans then campaign hard for their "stealth candidate" posing as a Democrat, asking all known Republicans to cross over in the primary—remember, they have nothing to lose. They win the primary with slightly more than a third—or less, depending on how many candidates were finally on that ballot—and the contest is over IN THE PRIMARY! The winner lets the election cool down for a while, then announces to the press that he is too conservative for the Democrats and has decided to switch parties, back to his original party of course. There is nothing anyone can do about it, and it is over before people know what happened. Sound like a fantasy? It happened to not one but two Democratic County Commissioner candidates in 1992. Both narrowly lost.
So let's try something new. If we must have political parties, then we have to grow up and accept the rules of political parties—that only the party can chose its own candidates. If we don't need political parties, then we can have open primaries with all candidates on the blanket primary ballot that allows every voter, regardless of their persuasion, to vote. The top two vote-getters progress to the general election and the most popular wins. But we can't continue to have it both ways.
LARRY DENNISON
PORT TOWNSEND
We the people
Hold on a minute, Roger Downey ["Party poopers," 2/15]. It's not the people versus the parties. We the people are the parties! My party "bosses" are my servants, for I have elected them. Inside a political party, anyone who organizes a neighborhood has more clout than a $1,000 contributor. A strong political party is the best means of holding elected officials accountable to a broad constituency. Parties are like unions; associations that balance the influence of the wealthy. You remember the wealthy? Some of them own newspapers that like to tell us how to vote.
