Where is this man's helmet?

There was decidedly less outrage at the latest extortion of Ashevile City Council last night.  Apparently, politicians who decry crony capitalism, corporatism and tax breaks for the wealthiest are only selectively outraged.

Remember the President's visit to Asheville's Linamar plant (recipient of millions of taxpayer largesse)?

It's okay to give these multi-billion dollar, multi-national corporations money - as long as the pol gets his picture taken.

From the President to the City Council, tax breaks for big corporations are cool.

With only a single dissenting vote, Council agreed on a $1.6 million dollar tax incentive package to an anoynmous private company – dubbed ‘Project X.’

The Tribune recently reported that the company is part of GE aviation.

The Citizen-Times reported that the company was threatening to leave if it didn’t get tax money.

This would sound like intimidation.

Bullying, even!

City Council has been ginning up outrage last week when Mountain Xpress published e-mails that Councilmembers say prove NC lawmakers are trying to force the Council to settle its lawsuit over the water system merger law.

But last night, only Cecil Bothwell opposed the blatant extortion by GE.  He said he didn't want to support a company that made "war machines." He suspected most of Asheville would agree with him, too.

The Mayor thought Bothwell was crossing a line of civility, noting that people who currently work at the facility probably wouldn't like be called warmongerers.

Gordon Smith said the deal made him a tad uncomfortable, but he voted for it.

It got me thinking...

Perhaps if the NC lawmakers threaten to move some jobs out of town, the Council would be more willing to settle its lawsuit.

Asheville City Council members say state lawmakers are trying to force them to ditch their lawsuit over the water system merger law.

Rep. Nathan Ramsey says no such thing is occurring.

The Council's premise is twofold:  First, that NC House lawmakers are trying to tank a bill that would allow for the voluntary merger of the City and County Parks & Rec operations.  Second, that these same lawmakers are threatening to impose district elections on the City Council.

The premise assumes both of these ideas are bad, and are, therefore, legislative extortion.

I looked at both of these issues in Friday's blog post, so I won't re-hash them here.

However, over the weekend, I had a brief Twitter discussion with Asheville City Councilman Gordon Smith.

Or at least, I tried...

Sounds more like rehashed talking points from forced changes to county system.

— Gordon Smith (@gordondsmith) June 8, 2013

I wasn't here for BOCC district elex debate, @gordondsmith. Do you think districts give minority voters representation?

— Pete Kaliner (@petekaliner) June 8, 2013

@petekaliner Forcing election changes in retaliation for not doing legislators bidding re: #avlh2o is bad government. Referendum anyone?

— Gordon Smith (@gordondsmith) June 8, 2013

I understand you & Council view it as a pressure tactic, @gordondsmith. I'm asking about the concept of district elections, though.

— Pete Kaliner (@petekaliner) June 8, 2013

@petekaliner It is an intimidation tactic. That is a true statement. Let's talk abt the concept of govt by bullying. What are yr thoughts?

— Gordon Smith (@gordondsmith) June 8, 2013

What is your view on district elections for City Council, @gordondsmith?Do you think district allow for minority representation? #avlgov

— Pete Kaliner (@petekaliner) June 8, 2013

Sorry, @gordondsmith, had friends in town so might have missed it - Your view on district elex for #AVLgov? Thanks!

— Pete Kaliner (@petekaliner) June 9, 2013

He never did respond to my question, which is pretty straightforward and simple.  Indeed, any and all sitting elected officials should be able to answer this question.

It's obvious that Councilman Smith doesn't want to answer the question, however. 

But here is why it's important...

If district elections are bad for Asheville voters, then Council members can say they are being pressured by state lawmakers. Indeed, this IS what Council is saying.  So, they are leading us to assume that they all believe district elections are not good for the citizens.  Voters should know why.

On the other hand, if district elections are GOOD for Asheville voters, then it cannot be extortion for state lawmakers to pursue the idea.  More so, if district voting is good for Asheville voters, the Council should be working WITH the NC House members to get it implemented.

Hence, my simple question to Councilman Smith.

And, hence, my surprise that there's been no reply.

As the blog title states: Can the Council be extorted for something it actually wants?

Quid pro quo

Now, Councilman Smith did ask me an open-ended question about "government bullying" which I did not answer. I chose not to answer because I suspected he was trying to divert the conversation away from the district election question I first asked him.

Given that a response does not seem to be coming from the Councilman, I will answer his question now.

"Government bullying" is redundant, Councilman.  As George Washington put it, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

The founders of the nation understood this simple truth about government, because government is conducted by people - who can be corrupt, petty, ego-maniacal, short-sighted, and power-hungry.  The solution was to pit these people against each other, in order to protect the liberty of the people as much as possible.

The City's fight with the State over control of the water system is a perfect example of it.  It's a fight over control - a very human desire. The government, itself, doesn't care about whether the water system is governed by an authority or the Council.  The people in the government, do, however.

So, do I like "government bullying?"  Of course not. 

But I recognize that government is coercive in nature and is, therefore, a form of bullying.  And because I understand the nature of government I prefer it to be limited.

I hope this addresses the Councilman's question.

I'm not expecting a similar courtesy for mine.