Berkeley’s City Council strikes again

By Julia Baumgaertner
From the April 2004 Print Edition

The Berkeley City Council has a noteworthy, if not commendable, past. Really. Berkeley students should be proud that their progressive community was the first to voluntarily desegregate public schools during the Civil Rights era, and to cut down street curbs, allowing for greater mobility amongst the disabled. Today, however, the Berkeley City Council forgets to focus on real issues, and instead uses its power to push its liberal agenda to disturbing heights.

Recently the Council proposed undertaking impeachment proceedings against President Bush. Not only was this action completely unfounded, but such deviance from past direct-action policies has only proven destructive, as it did little more than erase what little credibility the Council still had.

In March we saw the process begin with the Council first proposing a resolution calling for an impeachment investigation, then a vote in favor of a less farcical “formal censure” of the President. The Council abhors the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld administration, and claims the trifecta promotes peace by superior firepower. This alien Council lives in infamy for expending its energies meddling in foreign policy and acting as a parody of progressive civic governing. Futile attempts at radical change are made more comedic by the fact that they are being pushed at a time when Bay Area schools are in peril, the California State budget looks abysmal, and voter turnout at the latest election sagged at 35 percent.

However, the relentless Council pushed the resolution anyway, claiming that Bush and Cheney have deceived the public, Congress and the international community regarding the war in Iraq. Berkeley’s Peace and Justice committee planned to submit the resolution to the House Judiciary Committee by way of celebrity Representative Barbara Lee (D-Oakland) asking for an investigation into possible “impeachable offenses.’’ The U.S. Constitution defines these loosely as “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.’’ The accusatory nature of the resolution pointed to the President’s pre-war claims that Iraq held weapons of mass-destruction, aligned itself with Al-Queda and violated the US human rights of detainees, as basis for an investigation.

Rep. Barbara Lee remained unusually quiet about the proposed impeachment investigation and subsequent agreement to formally censure Bush. The uniquely Berkeley feeling of scorn at this silence was voiced by Councilwoman Dona Spring instead. Lee’s spokesman, Jeffrey Thomas reported that the representative “believes that the November election should be the referendum on George Bush.” Additionally, Spring herself was highly outspoken in her contempt for the President. “Bush was never elected; he took over in a coup,” she said publicly. “He should be put in jail.”

For a fleeting moment an unlikely voice of reason arose from Mayor Tom Bates: “It’s a non-starter. I can certainly sympathize with the thinking behind it, but it’s just not timely. It’s not going anyplace.” Yet our hopes were dashed when he quickly reverted back into his usual delinquency, saying the city is more likely to support a resolution by the liberal activist group MoveOn.org. This clan would campaign for Congress to formally censure Bush for “betraying the nation’s trust.’’

The cacophonous cries for his deposition and censure seem strangely irrelevant at a time when the country generally supports the President. Though lately the polarizing nature of such issues as the war in Iraq and gay marriage have destabilized his popularity, this ubiquitous anti-Bush sentiment in countless Bay Area enclaves seems quotidian at best.

Not surprisingly, with the national election looming ahead, countless resolutions to prune the shrub and hinder his chances at reelection have taken root in Berkeley. A formal censure of the president is music to the ears of local residents and students alike— Berkeley supporters of Kerry are beautifully harmonizing with now mute dreamy Deanies to rehearse for a regime change come November.

Appropriately, the Berkeley City Council members stand as jesters in the arena of civic government. Similar tantrums turned theatrics include resolutions involving television characters, nuclear free airspace, the refusal to display the American flag on fire trucks, and the latest antic: a car tax levied against owners of multiple vehicles, which has yet to make provisions for driving-age family members.

There have been no approximations on the city’s potential financial gains from the luxury tax, that is partly meant to mitigate budget issues resulting from vehicle-licensing fee changes, compliments of Governor Schwarzenegger. The idea is a noble one, and perhaps useful in a town where driveways are few and circling the block for street parking is akin to the finish at the Daytona 500.

Yet, just as students proof read, professors plan lectures, and actors rehearse their parts, the Berkeley City council should spend quality time reviewing its policies to avoid their usual embarrassment at the national level.

If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting the Patriot