Velvet Gloves on Iron Fists in New York's 11th Congressional District
As reported in the April 3rd, 2006 Kings Courier, one of two black workers in City Councilman David Yassky's office, Rickford Burke, resigned last week. Burke, a policy advisor to Yassky, questioned Yassky's attempt to become the congressman of the 11th Congressional District.
Burke is only the latest person to question Yassky's run in the 11th, which draws its roots back to the 1965 Voting Rights Act to ensure more African-American representation in Congress.
Burke, while commenting on Yassky's candidacy, said something rather peculiar.
"I don't think it's a good idea for him to run in a voting rights district," Burke said.
So much about rights.
Burke did add that he thinks Yassky would be a good candidate for Congress, "just not in this district because of all the political issues that are being raised."
All the issues being raised? There is only one issue that Yassky is desperately trying to defend himself from attack and that is the color of his skin.
Apparently, Yassky has no business in a "voting rights" district.
Burke tried to further explain the situation.
"Yassky and I have had a very good relationship, but when one analyzes all of the issues that arise out of his candidacy, anyone that has an objective view will understand my position, which is I don't think it's a good idea that he runs."
The one issue that Burke is talking about does make Yassky's run much harder as it forces him to defend who he is and what he was born as. All the other issues, issues that a representative will need to address, are swept aside during this campaign.
Burke also pointed out that should Yassky decide to hire more African-Americans for his office, it would show "political maturity."
The Courier did present the view from Yassky's camp, given by spokesman Evan Thies:
Yassky spokesperson Evan Thies said that, including Burke, there are two African-Americans working in Yassky’s six-person office, and that like many elected officials’ offices, there is a lot of turnover.
“We reach out to all parts of the community whenever we hire anyone and David is famous for doing exhaustive searches in finding the best candidates through a selection process, and that’s why he has such great staff over the years,” said Thies.
“Rickford’s politics are separate from his Council work, but he’s a well-respected member of the Brooklyn community and we’re certainly sorry to see him go,” Thies added.
Thies reiterated Yassky’s position that the reason the voting rights district was created was to make sure that minority communities that were underrepresented or kept from participating in the past were represented energetically and fairly.
“That’s exactly what David is going to do when he is congressman, and that’s why he’s spending so much time reaching out to every part of the 11th Congressional District,” said Thies.
“He represents a diverse Council district and will do the same thing for the 11th Congressional,” he added.
This has been the same position that Yassky's camp has given for a while, also reported in The Politicker:
Yassky responded that he believes "it's foremost in politicians and politicos minds," although he thinks voters are more concerned with issues than race.
"The district is drawn so that the community of color in that district is sure to get representation," he continued. "I don't think that means that the representative is supposed to be of a particular skin color or not. What it means is that person who is going to be representing them is going to do a great job for the community. The whole point of my campaign is I'm saying I think I can do that job, I want to do that job."
Yassky may not be the best man for the job. However, with the retirement of Major Owens, who has been the representative of the district for 24 years, this is the opportunity for Yassky and others to take the post. It is likely that the successor could also be in that office for two decades. So why shouldn't the debate be on who the best person is rather than the one person that has the wrong skin color?
With four other candidates, besides Yassky, to choose from, the voters of the 11th Congressional District have a rare opportunity to see a competitive primary with numerous candidates. They should be able to take advantage of that by hearing about what each candidate wants to do for the district, which includes people from many backgrounds, instead of silly attacks on how Yassky is encroaching on someone's rights by...gasp!...running for Congress.
The other candidates are City Councilmember Yvette Clarke, State Sen. Carl Andrews, Assemblymember Nick Perry, and Chris Owens, son of Major Owens. And they have as much of a right to win or lose based on merits and demerits as David Yassky does. But arguing about Yassky's run because of his skin color robs all of the candidates of that chance.
If people are willing to point out the lunacy of Charles Barron in the 10th Congressional District, then where are the people willing to point out the velvet-covered, racially-charged attacks on David Yassky in the 11th?
Burke is only the latest person to question Yassky's run in the 11th, which draws its roots back to the 1965 Voting Rights Act to ensure more African-American representation in Congress.
Burke, while commenting on Yassky's candidacy, said something rather peculiar.
"I don't think it's a good idea for him to run in a voting rights district," Burke said.
So much about rights.
Burke did add that he thinks Yassky would be a good candidate for Congress, "just not in this district because of all the political issues that are being raised."
All the issues being raised? There is only one issue that Yassky is desperately trying to defend himself from attack and that is the color of his skin.
Apparently, Yassky has no business in a "voting rights" district.
Burke tried to further explain the situation.
"Yassky and I have had a very good relationship, but when one analyzes all of the issues that arise out of his candidacy, anyone that has an objective view will understand my position, which is I don't think it's a good idea that he runs."
The one issue that Burke is talking about does make Yassky's run much harder as it forces him to defend who he is and what he was born as. All the other issues, issues that a representative will need to address, are swept aside during this campaign.
Burke also pointed out that should Yassky decide to hire more African-Americans for his office, it would show "political maturity."
The Courier did present the view from Yassky's camp, given by spokesman Evan Thies:
Yassky spokesperson Evan Thies said that, including Burke, there are two African-Americans working in Yassky’s six-person office, and that like many elected officials’ offices, there is a lot of turnover.
“We reach out to all parts of the community whenever we hire anyone and David is famous for doing exhaustive searches in finding the best candidates through a selection process, and that’s why he has such great staff over the years,” said Thies.
“Rickford’s politics are separate from his Council work, but he’s a well-respected member of the Brooklyn community and we’re certainly sorry to see him go,” Thies added.
Thies reiterated Yassky’s position that the reason the voting rights district was created was to make sure that minority communities that were underrepresented or kept from participating in the past were represented energetically and fairly.
“That’s exactly what David is going to do when he is congressman, and that’s why he’s spending so much time reaching out to every part of the 11th Congressional District,” said Thies.
“He represents a diverse Council district and will do the same thing for the 11th Congressional,” he added.
This has been the same position that Yassky's camp has given for a while, also reported in The Politicker:
Yassky responded that he believes "it's foremost in politicians and politicos minds," although he thinks voters are more concerned with issues than race.
"The district is drawn so that the community of color in that district is sure to get representation," he continued. "I don't think that means that the representative is supposed to be of a particular skin color or not. What it means is that person who is going to be representing them is going to do a great job for the community. The whole point of my campaign is I'm saying I think I can do that job, I want to do that job."
Yassky may not be the best man for the job. However, with the retirement of Major Owens, who has been the representative of the district for 24 years, this is the opportunity for Yassky and others to take the post. It is likely that the successor could also be in that office for two decades. So why shouldn't the debate be on who the best person is rather than the one person that has the wrong skin color?
With four other candidates, besides Yassky, to choose from, the voters of the 11th Congressional District have a rare opportunity to see a competitive primary with numerous candidates. They should be able to take advantage of that by hearing about what each candidate wants to do for the district, which includes people from many backgrounds, instead of silly attacks on how Yassky is encroaching on someone's rights by...gasp!...running for Congress.
The other candidates are City Councilmember Yvette Clarke, State Sen. Carl Andrews, Assemblymember Nick Perry, and Chris Owens, son of Major Owens. And they have as much of a right to win or lose based on merits and demerits as David Yassky does. But arguing about Yassky's run because of his skin color robs all of the candidates of that chance.
If people are willing to point out the lunacy of Charles Barron in the 10th Congressional District, then where are the people willing to point out the velvet-covered, racially-charged attacks on David Yassky in the 11th?
posted by Will at 11:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home