Questions for the three mayoral candidates invited by American University

American University sponsored a kind of Potemkin village debate among only three mayoral candidates.  The audience were only political hacks and campaign staff, mainly Bowser's, who were bused in before tickets were given out and got all the tickets for the main hall (the event was cosponsored by Palisades and Ward 3 groups, but neighborhood people who showed up were shunted across the building to an overflow room),  the three candidates squabbled among themselves in a slightly childish fashion, and their supporters shouted and were rude.  Both the candidates and their cheerleaders were admonished to behave a number of times by moderator Tom Sherwood.

We also learned that all three candidates favor disarming DC citizens and all three favor increased spending on a variety of programs.  We also learned that all of them think the other two were incompetent and unproductive in the past while on the city council, and that they are less than truthful about their records.  Perhaps we should trust their assessments of their opponents?

Needless to say none of the candidates identified ANY metrics showing that their past legislation has had any positive effects, in a city they all admit has double digit unemployment in Wards 7 and 8, and among the highest dropout and truancy rates in the country (calling Dr. Freud: Carol Schwartz said the book she would require DC students to read would be "A Tale of Two Cities"). And Catania did not tell us what his many many proposed programs would cost, nor where he would extract the loot for them from the taxpayer. 
 
I am a little surprised AU didn't invite David Pitts and Richard Berendzen to officiate.

1. For Catania, Schwartz and Bowser:  $29,000 is budgeted per pupil for students attending traditional public schools, but only $17,000 for charter students and even less ($12,000) for students using a DC Opportunity Voucher to attend an independent school.  Will you end this discriminatory and unequal funding, and allow all students the same resources, no matter where they choose to learn?

2.  For Catania: You propose to spend more on programs for failing schools, trees, immigrant healthcare, the homeless, college scholarships, daycare, paid family leave, affordable housing, and many other programs, and have suggested raising taxes to pay for this.  You also say you want to bring more and diverse businesses and jobs to DC.  How will you get business to move to DC when you raise their taxes for your new programs?  Follow up:  How much is the total budget for your new programs?

3. For Catania, Schwartz and Bowser:  In 1996 the DC voters voted for a term limit referendum by a 2/3rds majority; it passed by a majority in every Ward.  The City Council then overturned it.  How is the DC government legitimate if it nullified a basic constituitive principle passed by the voters?  How would you vote today?  For Schwartz:  How did you vote?

4. For Bowser, Catania and Schwartz:  It is widely discussed by the public that officials in the Metropolitan police department may have covered up domestic abuse in the past by DC politicians.  Would you investigate these stories?

5. For Schwartz:  You have said charter schools should be more closely regulated because some have misused funds.  But the traditional public schools spend $29,000 per pupil to produce at best equal results to those of charters, which receive only $17,000 per pupil.  How would you investigate the misuse of funds by the DC public schools?  Where is the money going?

6. For Catania:  You have called for subsidies for day care.  But independent providers of K-6 education and after school care in DC are regulated by different agencies from those that regulate public and charter schools, and are required to have more staff, more bathroom facilities, etc. per the same number of students, as well as other more costly amenities (e.g., cots off the floor instead of mats).  What have you done in the past to address this?

7. For Catania, Schwartz, and Bowser:  Mr. Catania’s 126 page booklet details how he has steered hundreds of millions of dollars to programs he favored, Ms. Schwartz’s 15 page paper details her history working on education issues, and Ms. Bowser has served on the city council for several years.  Yet as Mr. Catania’s booklet shows in various graphs, Wards 7 and 8 have double digit unemployment, and DC schools have higher truancy and drop out rates than anywhere in the United States, while spending more per pupil.  What metrics show that your past activities and expenditures have produced results?

8. For Catania:  You propose to expand facilities for the homeless in DC.  How will you ensure that DC does not end up absorbing the homeless from the entire region from Baltimore to Richmond, at taxpayer expense?

9. For Schwartz, Catania, and Bowser:  DC residents convicted of federal crimes are dispersed through prisons around the country, so that their relatives cannot easily visit them, which may frustrate their reintegration into society.  What plans do you have to address this and have them housed closer to DC?

10. For Catania, Schwartz, and Bowser:  DC has reduced its homicide rate, but has regular car and home theft and vandalism, as well as muggings, gay bashings etc.  Yet police resources are used on ticket traps and victimless crimes.  What have you done in the past to address the misallocation of police resources?

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor, 1200 23rd Street NW, Washington DC 20037

Posh perks for Muriel Bowser and other city council members - at your expense

Democratic Party contradictions - what I learned at the mayoral fora

I've attended three mayoral forums so far, the DC for Democracy and the Board of Trade Democrats only forums as an audience member, and the ACLU forum as a candidate.

One funny thing about the forums is that if the group has money most candidates show up, and if it doesn't only half the candidates do.  Mayor Gray skipped the ACLU, Andy Shallal skipped the ACLU and the Board of Trade (a supporter told me he had a family emergency),  Muriel Bowser skipped the ACLU and DC for Democracy, Jack Evans skipped DC for Democracy, Carlos Allen skipped the Board of Trade, where there was a seat and name card waiting for him, but I think he may not have known he was invited.

Upcoming forums that include me are the March 10 DC Statehood Committee forum at Martin Luther King library and the neighborhood forum for Takoma Park, DC and surrounding neighborhoods.

Here are the five contradictions I've noticed repeated by most of the Democrats:

DC Democratic Party contradiction 1 - Virginia and Maryland suburbanites come to DC and take our good jobs, and we can't tax their incomes - so we are going to use DC taxpayer dollars to subsidize their metro fares so they can get here easier.

DC Democratic Party contradiction 2 (Tommy Wells edition) - we want urban planning where DC is a walkable city and everyone can walk within 5 minutes to school or work, AND we want more tax dollars spent on metro so employers can all relocate to Georgetown while workers are segregated in Anacostia, with the taxpayer footing the transportation bill.

DC Democratic Party contradiction 3 - We want to make DC tax rates on commercial property, business income, etc etc competitive with Virginia to keep jobs here, AND we can't name a single program or agency we would cut or eliminate.

DC Democratic Party contradiction 4 (everybody but Tommy Wells edition) - we want to decriminalize pot, in part to end the huge racial disparity in arrests (8 times as likely for black pot users - weirdly twice the national average disparity of 3.7 times as likely!), but we want to keep it a crime or have a high fine for smoking on the street or in public, as black youth are more likely to do than whites.

DC Democratic Party contradiction 5 - the number of homeless living on the streets in DC is rising rapidly, with hypothermia for the homeless, nuisance and crime for everyone else, and hygiene issues for both, AND our Democratic solution to this is to build more and nicer taxpayer funded housing for homeless people who come to DC, without collaboration with Maryland or Virginia, so we can import all the homeless from Richmond to Baltimore and beyond.

Advance peak at Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor, responses to the WAMU questionnaire

Campaign Questions

How would you create more affordable housing?

I would increase the supply and decrease the price of all housing. Zoning and other regulations increase the cost of producing housing by 30-40%, including for groups that build affordable housing. In D.C. additionally we cannot build tall apartment or condominium buildings, even in neighborhoods where across a river or across a street there are 40 story buildings in Bethesda, Silver Spring, or Arlington. Finally D.C.'s rent control and tenant laws are the last remaining vestige of Nixon's wage and price controls, left over from when D.C. was administered by the federal government. Rent control and other tenancy laws in D.C. have encouraged investors to sell smaller and older multi-unit buildings off for condominium conversion, leaving only newly constructed luxury rentals as additions to the rental market. As a realtor I frequently run into investors and other realtors who deliberately abandon D.C. for Maryland and Virginia. I would abolish these laws and regulations.

Should green card holders who reside in D.C. be allowed to vote in local elections?

A much higher priority is restoring voting rights to felons who were convicted of non-violent, victimless, crimes. DC residents born in DC have been stripped of rights. My strongest feeling about this green card question is to marvel at its prioritization as a question you would ask in a mayoral race in a city with decades old tragedies of dysfunctional government schools that at least half the students still attend and youth and minority unemployment rates approaching 20% - and higher for minority youth.

I can see either side of this argument but I lean "No." I believe people already do vote in D.C. without being U.S. citizens by getting a taxpayer identification number and a driver's license while here on a student or other visa, and then voting, and the system is incompetent to identify them as ineligible. But I do not favor legalizing this activity. I favor free immigration and making it easier to live and work in the U.S., but I believe one should become a citizen to vote.

Do you support campaign finance reform? If so, what reforms would you be in favor of?

Yes. I favor having incumbents signing a contract as a condition of employment stating that they will not accept political action committee contributions in their re-election campaigns, but only contributions from individual donors. I also favor sitting some overall limit for the total contributions an incumbent can accept (say $250,000), again as a condition of employment in their contract.

Other limits of spending or giving by individuals and associations of individuals violates the First Amendment guarantees of freedom or speech and of association. But incumbents, who are the primary beneficiaries of both their positions and financial donations from organized groups, can be limited as a condition of employment.

Additionally I favor barring incumbents, again as part of an employment contract, from being involved in charities, since we have seen them siphon funds from them while using their office to help raise money intended for the charity.

What changes, if any, would you make to the teacher evaluation process?

I favor more parental involvement in teacher evaluation. Ideally this is achieved by expanding charter schools, education voucher programs, and education tax credits so that parents and families have the same freedom of choice they would have when they shop for music lessons or swimming lessons.

For parents whose children remain in traditional government schools it would be good to involve parents in hiring or promoting teachers. One method would be to have parents do end of year teacher assessments, scored and published much as college students evaluate professors at the end of a semester. Teachers who receive low evaluations would not be eligible for promotion, raises, or even contract renewals. They would be invited to seek other employment. I also favor reducing any barriers to parents participating in classrooms; encouraging parents to be on site and involved during the school day would help keep communities informed about how schools and teachers operate.

Where do you stand on the D.C. United stadium proposal?

Against it. I oppose government subsidies or even tax breaks for stadiums, as I do for all businesses. Public policy studies have shown these stadiums do not benefit the local economy. I am opposed to government picking winners and losers, and to the government class being in a position to hand out benefits to cronies and campaign donors. We have corruption in D.C. because we have a $12 billion honey pot that attracts thieves. We must cut the budget, cut spending, and end mayoral or city council discretion or influence over who receives land parcels, grants, subsidies etc.

I favor auctioning off D.C. parcels and closed or abandoned stadiums in open, transparent auctions. I also favor allowing the transfer of some abandoned D.C. properties to non-profits that provide community programs.

If there is a demand for a stadium a consortium of businesses can raise the capital to develop it nearby in an area that will not produce traffic gridlock in D.C.

Where do you stand on the legalization of Marijuana?

For it. We waste money and ruin lives harassing and incarcerating those who use marijuana. I favor decriminalization. I also favor radical reductions in the D.C. regulatory thicket that keeps the local private economy from creating jobs in D.C. for people who do not have law degrees and do not work for federal bureaucracies or lobbying firms. This thicket kept D.C. from having a medical marijuana dispensary until the past few months, over a decade after medical marijuana was legalized. And we still have no producers permitted and licensed to grow plants to supply it.

I also favor a partial "ban the box" where the D.C. government is not allowed to ask prospective employees about their marijuana use or about any past convictions anywhere for any drug crime or other victimless crime (e.g. prostitution).

I would expunge all criminal records of D.C. residents convicted of non-violent victimless crimes, including marijuana sale, possession or use, and pardon the incarcerated.