Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Party Leaders Make Case For Council Control

Star political columnist Matt Tully gives the respective leaders of the Democratic and Republican Parties a crack at explaining to voters why electing a majority of their members to the council is the right/left thing to do. Mike O'Connor goes first, and here's what he had to say:

  • "O'Connor said his party would more effectively focus on regional economic development and streamlining government because its council members work well with Mayor Bart Peterson, whom O'Connor expects to win a third term next month. Translated, O'Connor means there will be more tax increases, including a regional commuter tax so suburbanites can help fuel the Peterson spending machine.
  • "O'Connor said his party would spend the next four years expanding opportunities for businesses owned by women and minorities and ensuring that rights for gay workers and residents are protected -- and perhaps expanded. That, he said, will put Indianapolis "on the forefront of creating a positive business atmosphere" and the kind of inclusive big-city environment many businesses seek." Translated, O'Connor means more ghost employment opportunities for council members, more contracts for shell companies fronting as MBEs/WBEs to funnel taxpayer dollars into the hands of council members (i.e., Monroe Gray) and campaign contributors and more city contracts for Printing Partners.

Tom John offers voters this choice if Republicans are handed council control:

  • First, he said, a GOP majority would end Democratic Councilman Monroe Gray's controversial tenure as president. "If you want our city to move forward, you need to elect (candidates) who will stand up in a bipartisan way and welcome an open debate on the issues that are key to the city," John said. Do you need any other reason to ask for a GOP majority?
  • "John said anti-crime measures would be a priority of a Republican-led council." It works for me as long as it doesn't mean higher taxes.
  • "Republicans intend to focus on controlling tax rates and more intensely scrutinizing spending by city and county officeholders. He said Republicans would look for creative ways -- such as selling off "underutilized assets" -- that could finance improvements to streets, sidewalks and other infrastructure." It sounds good, but GOP members had better become more alert than they've been recently. Democrats have slipped some real doozies past them without so much as a whimper from anyone on the Republican side.


Anonymous said...

A pox on both their houses:

Bronx cheer to O'Connor, for not pushing the mayor to denounce Monroe Gray, Ron Gibson and King Ro Conley for complete and utter lack of leadership, and frankly, for going in the exact oppositer direction of leadership. Hint: Mike--the party faiuthful were PRAYING you'd push the mayor to at least call Monroe what he is: a bad leader.

Double Bronx cheer to Tom John for not getting better council candidates than he got. Some good ones, but a pretty pathetic lot.

And to both chairs: this question by Tully, at this time, was lazy and designed to sew dischord. I'd have told him as much and quit answering non-substantive questions.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Tulley should have asked Tom John why they are so concerned with council seats and not the mayors' office.

Anonymous said...

I would hate to see the Democrats lose the majority but if it takes that to get rid of the drunken cop abusing Ron Gibson, SO BE IT!!!!

Anonymous said...

uh, if the demos lose you get rid of monroe gray as ccc president. that's something to cheer for as well.

anyone think time mcquire really has a chance? of course not but i've never seen a ccc candidate work harder.

Anonymous said...

Everyone knows that if the Demos retain control of the council that there is no chance that the crook Monroe Gray will be elected president....that has already been decided. It wont be that drunk Ron Gibson either...I guess I should call him the Christian Drunk.