 |
ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS HERALD |
 |
||
|
||||
|
WHEN GOOD GOVERNMENT MEETS REALITY Montgomery County, Maryland – an upscale suburb nestled against the northwest section of Washington, DC – has long been in the advance guard of liberal thought and practice. Far ahead of less progressive parts of the country, Montgomery County has pioneered in providing the compassionate good life for its diverse population by extracting high taxes from those with means so generous benefits can be provided for those who are not “winners in the lottery of life”. During our sojourn there the county proudly did much to lift up the less fortunate This included creating a county agency whose mission was to provide housing for families who could not really afford to live in the county. A good friend of ours directed that agency. He believed passionately in his work. Early in our relationship I learned that his agency’s mission was not really a debatable topic. For him and thousands of citizens in the county, such liberal activism was a given – worth whatever it cost them and other residents. Montgomery County has also been a prime exemplar of “good government” – that marvelous construct in which communities elect enlightened representatives who govern openly and respectfully. Political decisions are never made secretly or dishonestly. Special interests are banished from the realm. All is goodness, correctness and generosity. Even more than liberalism, Montgomery County’s commitment to good government has been its hallmark. In recent weeks, however, citizens of Gaithersburg – a city in the northern part of the county – have had their commitment to both liberalism and good government tested. Residents of Gaithersburg’s historic district have been irritated by crowds of day laborers who gather in the Grace United Methodist Church parking lot each morning to wait for work. There they drink, urinate, and catcall at women who visit the nearby shopping center. Resident Clark Day said he awoke at 6 AM one morning to find a man showering in his driveway with his garden hose. But mere irritation over the day laborers’ intrusions turned to outrage when residents learned that the City Council had agreed to build a day laborer shelter on a main street in the historic district without consulting with them. Mr. Day and other residents say the plan violates city code because it wasn’t discussed openly. He also objects to locating such a facility in the historic district. “That’s not what I want [at] the entrance of my historic community, which has more stringent rules … than normal communities,” said Mr. Day. “That’s not why we moved here.” Dan Searles says he and other residents don’t mind immigrants living in the community, but they object to the city not informing them of the plan to build the center. Residents say officials had led them to believe that retail shops and condominiums would occupy the site. Montgomery County developed the plan for the laborers’ shelter with input from Grace United Methodist Church and Casa of Maryland. (The latter are non-profit advocates for Hispanics and immigrants.) Only minimal input was sought from the Gaithersburg City Council, and no council members were present at the planning meetings. The plan calls for the county to underwrite the project and for the city to donate as much as $100,000 for renovating a building. In the roar of outrage following these disclosures, the city council suspended plans for the shelter. Montgomery County also withdrew its support. An uneasy truce prevails, but savvy old-timers know advocates will keep trying until they get the shelter approved and built. “It’s inevitable,” said a resident who asked not to be named. “Day-worker shelters are going up over residents’ objections in Wheaton (Montgomery County) and Herndon (Fairfax County, VA). Our turn is coming. Notice how they don’t talk about putting them in Potomac, Bethesda, or Great Falls.” (The latter are upper-class suburbs in the DC area.) Clark Day, Dan Searles and other residents of Gaithersburg’s historic district just found out that there are limits to everything – even to good government and to progressive liberalism itself. (Maybe Montgomery County and Gaithersburg City Council officials learned a few things, too.) Good government works when everybody is on the same page – in unanimous (or near-unanimous) agreement over applying and advancing progressive ideas. But when people disagree, it takes more than a skin-deep commitment for GG to work. Then, it is tempting – beyond the ability of most people to resist – to bend the rules or even to play dirty so goals deemed critical can be won. Winning, it turns out, is far more important than good form and good government. Vince Lombardi called it “winning ugly”. (Lombardi said winning was “the only thing”.) The liberal vision also has its limits. For most that limit is the point where our stuff (home value, income, opportunities, job, education) gets hurt, while others’ stuff remains untouched. Residents of the Gaithersburg historic district thought the new shelter could hurt their properties. Meanwhile, others could feel good about their compassion and have their property values remain untouched. This seemed fundamentally unfair. The cost (or “pain”) of liberalism needs to be shared equally – or at least according to people’s means – not just by a few. But liberalism also depends on good government for more complex reasons. Remember Dan Searles saying he didn’t object to the immigrants – only to the council’s failure to notify them about the shelter-plan? Why was this an issue? Perhaps because timely notification would have let residents retain legal counsel and fight the shelter on suitable grounds like “environment” or “public safety”. The surprise notice eliminated their ability to oppose the shelter in ways that didn’t look racist or non-compassionate. Remaining politically correct while looking after one’s self-interest is very important to a liberal. Once, “liberalism” meant opening up opportunities so people could better themselves – opportunities perhaps denied to them previously by prejudice and unreasonable institutional obstacles. This liberalism harmed no one and cost nothing. It was a win for the entire country. But furnishing opportunities did not guarantee success. Often the “right” people did not succeed, so liberalism tried to produce certain results. Finally, liberalism degenerated into taking from some to benefit others. It became legalized theft. It hurt people. It began to hurt the country. This is where property owners in Gaithersburg’s historic district find themselves. They might be hurt in order to fulfill others’ concept of compassion. This is where they part company from the liberal vision they and others in Montgomery County have lived by these many years. Unfortunately, that conversion might only be temporary. Those same property owners could still accept the workers’ shelter if it is located elsewhere and affects someone else’s property. They might agree to letting others be injured if they are spared themselves. As they say, it all depends on whose ox is being gored…
|
|
| ||||||
