Thursday July 12, 2007 | Methinks that Councilwoman Donna Frye, along with the other three, voted correctly to sustain Mayor Sander’s veto on this issue.

However, my take on her reason for voting as she did leaves me with some doubt as to whether or not I would vote for her (again) should she decide to run for mayor in the next election. It appears that her motive is to not alienate those who would vote for her (indicating that she is considering another run for that office) rather than her being altruistic towards those of us who live below the federal poverty-income level.

She undoubtedly realized that if the veto had been overturned, Wal-Mart would have gotten the issue on the ballot and would have obtained an overwhelming vote in its favor; and that her vote to override the veto would have gone against her while she campaigned for mayor.

Had her motive been altruistic rather than selfish (as indicated by her proposed work-around Los Angeles style, which would appease the unions somewhat), I would again vote for her; but now, I’m not so sure. I would like to see the people’s needs being thought of as being superior to those of special-interests groups.

Leave a comment

We expect all commenters to be constructive and civil. We reserve the right to delete comments without explanation. You are welcome to flag comments to us. You are welcome to submit an opinion piece for our editors to review.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.