"After having read Mr. Cox’s proposal for more public participation in appointing citizen volunteers to Boards, Commissions, and Committees, I was reminded of Lyndon Johnson’s response to some political mechanization by Senator Fulbright (who Johnson referred to as Senator Halfbright): 'That is political pandering of the worse kind, unsuccessful.' This is not to say, as one may at first think, that there is less to Mr. Cox’s proposal than meets the eye. For I think that the proposal illustrates the qualities of Mr. Cox that have made him the councilman that he is today.

The political sentiment that Mr. Cox builds his proposal on certainly cannot be argued against with any seriousness, i.e., that government should be as democratic and as open as possible. This sentiment, used as the bait of this particular switch and pander move, however, must be viewed within the context of the situation and not as a uniform truth regardless of context.

What Mr. Cox is essentially proposing is to raise the level of duress responsible citizens would have to undertake in order to serve the Council, hence the City, on a volunteer basis. What Mr. Cox is proposing is to make the process so cumbersome, drawn out, and divisive that few citizens, unless tied professionally to the respective platforms to which they are applying, would bother to come forward and place their energy and good will into the work of the City. Ironically, the consequence of implementing such a proposal would be to narrow, rather than widen, the pool of applicants.

A case in point is myself. Having had the good fortune of being appointed by City Council and serving at its pleasure on the CDBG for four years, with the last two as its chair, I can honestly say that I would not have gone through such a process as Mr. Cox has proposed. I would have submitted to an essay exam and have allowed my answers to be reviewed by the public, but I would not have put myself through the ordeal of being cross-examined by factions from special interests. (If I were willing to do that, I would have run for Council in the first place.)

Mr. Cox justifies putting volunteers through this gauntlet by comparing the process to when Council had hired a circuit court judge. This is less of a comparison, however, than a contrast. (This is the ‘switch’ in Mr. Cox’s bait, switch, and pander move.) A circuit court judge has a salary and, more important, authority. No doubt the City’s Planning Commissioners, for instance, are paid at a rate of $75.00 and change a month. This amount cannot seriously be analogous to a judge’s pay. (The monthly sum Commissioners receive does not begin to cover the fee for the therapy sessions they inevitably will need.)

It is also a contrast, not a comparison, in that citizenry boards serve to recommend, not actually decide, decisions and policies to Council. They have no unilateral authority. Judges have such authority and therefore must be under wider scrutiny. In effect, Council asks citizens to volunteer their time to assist the Council. If the decisions Council makes are not viewed favorably by the public, then Council members will pay for that dissatisfaction come election time.

There are two things that make a successful elected leader: vision and direction. Four years ago I voted for a person who spoke words of vision. Four years have shown me that Mr. Cox does not have the direction to reach his vision. He simply makes proposals that pander to it'" (Chace Anderson, electronic mail, February 6, 2000).