 |
EMIL
FRANZI |
Paving the way to more unselected regional governmentNovember 28 2007 |
There may be one more big
loser in Tucson’s recent city election that has yet to
be reported: representative government.
Former State Rep. John Kromko’s failed attempt to change local water policy via the initiative process in Tucson, the area’s largest water-controlling jurisdiction, has the folks who just stomped on Kromko now thanking him for bringing up the subject. They’re calling for “greater co-operation” to face a “regional problem.” That’s the current politically correct way to describe the plan to create a regional entity modeled on the new Regional Transportation Authority and place under its control all water decisions. Some of us are concerned about a more fundamental question that transcends all the other problems and issues we always will have to deal with. That question supercedes right and left, conservative and liberal, Democrat and Republican. That question is: Who shall govern? The RTA transferred authority, including taxing power, from many local governments to one regional grouping. It has a quasi-representative base with a board of directors composed primarily of elected officials from the jurisdictions it comprises. This is supplemental duty for those officials, meaning they will have a minimum of time to devote to their oversight roles. Most barely exercise their roles now in the jurisdictions from which they come. On regional authorities they will be even bigger potted plants. Put that aside. The principle is indirect representation, best typified by the original Electoral College and the practice of choosing U.S. senators by state legislatures. While there may be some paleo-conservatives who liked it that way, I can’t grasp why anybody else would fall for it. In the name of “efficiency” and “co-operation” it will continue to empower an unelected bureaucracy, which should turn off most of the right and further empower the “ruling class,” which should turn off most of the left. Note that its advocates primarily spring from the corporate center. Voters will get to vote — once. If they give up their decision-making powers they then will only exert indirect control over some members of the new water authority. It is doubtful that if the decisions made by that new water authority will even be known to them. We barely notice what our public officials do now because most in the media barely comprehend it, let alone report it. But there’s a more obvious reason for the push to regional government. The recently defeated Proposition 200 wasn’t the first water initiative presented to Tucson voters. There were three others in the 1990s. The first two passed, limiting what could be done with CAP water. There was a lot more than Kromko leading that anti-establishment charge, including the old Tucson Weekly, which was then still a genuine alternative newspaper. The opposition consisted of pretty much the same folks as this time around — land speculators, developers, homebuilders and car dealers, with one exception. One of the latter actually financed all three “yes” campaigns. The third try fulfilled the proponents’ suicidal urge to keep running one until they lost. No other form of the issue was placed before the voters again until Kromko decided to almost single-handedly relive past glory. Note that transferring the powers over water decisions to an unelected RTA- type entity will accomplish one other giant change. Never again will a Kromko or anybody else be able to run an initiative or a referendum on the subject, not in Tucson, Marana, Oro Valley or Sahuarita. It will permanently eliminate the initiative option. I have written before about my general opposition to and the flaws contained in the initiative process. But, until other reforms are passed that would re-establish great portions of representative government, such as shorter terms and a host of new elected officials, I’d just as soon keep it around. Ask the proponents of a regional water authority the following: Why not directly elect the board members and allow for initiatives and referendums?
|
BUT WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! |
|
|
|||
