Residents of Superior will be asked this election day the following question: “Shall the City of Superior establish a City Administrator position and a part-time Mayor?” The Northwoods Worker blog recommends that folks vote “no”. Here is why.
This issue has come up because back in 2019 the city paid a consulting group, RW Management Group, to look into ways that the city could be more efficient. Among the many recommendations by RW Management, one was that the city make its elected full-time mayor a part-time position, and hire a full-time City Manager to run the day to day affairs.
It later came out that RW Management automatically makes this same recommendation to every municipality that hires it, regardless of the specific situation of that community. Nevertheless, proponents of doing this point to studies that suggest cities that have un-elected, professional city managers, have less conflict in their city council meetings. They also suggest that this is a way to de-politicize city government. We on the other hand, that these arguments are actually some of the best reasons to oppose this sort of thing.
As socialists, it’s difficult to find much to support about the way our current government is structured, from the national to the local level. The various branches of governments, and the much touted “checks and balances” that we learn about in civics class, are actually meant to keep dramatic change from happening. The ‘founding fathers’ were very much afraid of workers and farmers, who they referred to as “King Mob”. To guard against this threat, they wanted a system, that while it presented itself as a democracy, was nevertheless one that didn’t get too carried away so as to be too democratic. They designed a system where real decision making was done by thoughtful, cautious, ‘educated’, property owning types, such as themselves.
Fortunately, throughout our history there have at least been moments when “King Mob” was able to flex its muscles and make itself heard. Shay’s Rebellion in the late 1780s won us the Bill of Rights. The abolition movement, slave uprisings and the Civil War opened up the electorate to African-Americans, at least a tiny bit, with it later opening further as a result of the Civil Rights movement, as well as contemporary anti-racist movements. Similarly, the suffragette movement, the labor movement and activists from indigenous, Latinx and Asian-American communities all played a key role is bending and prying a bit more democracy from the founding fathers restrictive machinery.
The limited democratic rights we have were won in struggle. And they have to continually be defended from attempts to roll them back. For that reason, as a general rule we should always support any measure that makes our system more democratic, and oppose any measure that makes it less so, no matter what excuse is given for it.
While most socialists believe that executive positions, like mayors, governors and presidents, should be done away with under socialism and replaced by elected, recallable councils representing workplaces and communities, in the capitalist here and now, we feel it is better to have an elected executive, than an appointed one. Professional managers may result in city councils having less turmoil and debate, but is that a good thing? Isn’t the “professionalization” of politics and administration inherently undemocratic? No matter how you structure it, it is a step back from the kind of at least limited democratic accountability that you have with an elected mayor. Democracy can be messy, but ultimately we would argue that our system needs more debate, that more things need to be challenged and “politicized”.
The more people have a direct say in the matters that effect their lives, the more democratic things are. Requiring voters to elect city councilors who then will appoint a professional city manager from a limited pool of resumes, that no doubt will be heavy on their academic and employment credentials, but light on their political views and life experiences, simply creates an unnecessary barrier between voters and those who run our government.
The state of Wisconsin does not allow municipalities to set up the kind of executive free, elected workers council that socialists advocate. For that we’ll need to galvanize King Mob once again for a good old fashioned revolution. But in the meantime, lets at the very least keep our elected mayor, and say “NO!” to any kind of appointed city manager.
No comments:
Post a Comment