July 2, 2009
I wrote earlier this week about how well the politicos were getting along at the celebration honoring the Socorro High School baseball team.
But after a few conversations with people, I am starting to think that maybe I got that one wrong. It's true that they were all on the same page, but when you get right down to it, there weren't really that many politicos there.
The victory of the Socorro Bulldogs was historic and should've been celebrated by the entire county. It's not every day that a team from El Paso goes all the way and becomes the best team in the Lone Star State.
This was a victory that should've bought out the leadership from the entire county. I wrote about who was in attendance, but there were plenty of political leaders who weren't in attendance. Here's a list of local elected officials in the county who were not in attendance:
-- Senator Eliot Shapleigh
-- Representative Joe Pickett
-- Representative Marisa Marquez
-- Representative Joe Moody
-- County Judge Anthony Cobos
-- Commissioner Anna Perez
-- Commissioner Dan Haggerty
-- Mayor John Cook
-- City Reps. Emma Acosta, Susie Byrd, Ann Lilly, Beto O'Rourke, Eddie Holguin, and Rachel Quintana
I know what you're thinking -- this was the Socorro team, so why should people show up? Simple, because it was a victory for the whole county. As O'Rourke put it regarding the bridge, there is a regional impact.
I can't help but think that if it was Franklin High that won a state championship that the celebration would've been much different. Don't you think Mesa would've been shut down and the parade would've started at the airport? I'm betting every political somebody would've been there.
Governing Philosophies
As you may know, I am working on an independent television project that is focused on entertainment, culture, and politics. So we filmed the political segment last night partially in a limousine and partially at Club 101. The limo segment was my favorite because I was riding around with three political personalities who couldn't be more different from one another, Holguin, Ortega, and former mayoral candidate Alfrank Catucci.
As we cruised from the Eastside to the Westside and back again, we started to talk a little about the direction of the city which eventually led to a philosophical discussion about governance. Okay, it wasn't all about politics because when you get me and Catucci together having a good time, it could turn in to a rap video at any minute.
After some lighthearted conversation about City Council fashion, which basically consisted of how many suits Ortega owns and Holguin's latest edition to his tie collection, we got back to government philosophy. But Ortega's and Holguin's philosophies really put their political differences in focus and gives you insight on why they vote the way they vote. It comes down to 'representative' versus 'trustee' government.
Holguin believes in Representative Government, meaning that he will vote the way his constituents want, regardless of his own personal feelings on an issue. That takes a tremendous amount of self-discipline and I am sure that at some point he may find an issue that is non-negotiable in terms of his personal beliefs. That's when he's really going to be challenged.
The hard part about Representative Government is that it's difficult to quantify how your constituency truly feels about an issue without an election or making phone calls to every single voter in the district. No one can do that, so an elected official has to gauge the sentiment of the community based on contacts to their office. There is a major flaw in that technique because you will only hear from people who are passionate enough about an issue to pick up the phone or shoot a quick email.
That may or may not affect the sentiment of the district.
The Trustee form of government basically says that the people elect their leadership to make the right decisions on their behalf. So Ortega votes in a way that he believes will be best for the community, even if that means it may not always be. This philosophy also requires a high degree of self-discipline because it's easy to cast a vote when it's a popular thing to do, but not so easy when it's not popular but still the best decision.
Trustee government also has its flaws, the biggest being predicated on the elected official being intelligent and honest. We all know that certainly isn't always the case in this town.
The other flaw is that if you upset the electorate too much, it's the fastest way to the unemployment line in politics.
Despite its flaws, Trustee government is pretty efficient, especially for a long term agenda. Though they differ on most issues that come before council the fact that there are two strong voices to effectively articulate their arguments is, at the end of the day, a good thing for El Paso.
But I think Alfrank Catucci is right, more of the business of government should be decided over a couple of cold ones. There's less argument that way.
***
Abeytia writes the Lionstar blog and is a political animal who spends way too much time traveling the wilds of El Paso politics. Reach him at lionstar@thelionstarblog.com.