Should arrest disqualify you from City Council?
Quote of the day from Baltimore City Councilman Ed Reisinger, from Laura Vozzella's column today:
"He made some wrong decisions with whatever he did. Anyone who's been arrested, especially when you're in the city of Baltimore -- you know what I mean -- are we going to disqualify them from employment?"
The councilman is not talking about just any employment, but employment as a councilman. He's talking about William "Pete" Welch, who wants to join the council vacated by his mother, Agnes Welch.
As Vozzella points out, he's got a bit of a past.
In 1999, he was charged with attempted murder and illegal possession of a handgun, but he pleaded guilty to second-degree assault, reckless endangerment and discharging a firearm. He got probation before judgment (Note to the police commissioner -- does he qualify as a bad guy with guns?)
At the time, Welch gave two stories -- that he fired his gun into the ground to restore order and then that it accidentally went off. Trouble is, Vozzella reports, he was restoring order during a dispute over $40 he had promised to a woman for working the polls for his mother. It's called walking around money, and at the time that too was illegal.
But that's not all. In June 2004, Welch pleaded guilty to failing to filing campaign finance reports and perjury related to those reports. Vozzella notes that he's a certified public accountant.
Read Vozzella's column to get a full take on what City Council members think of the situation.Categories: Confronting crime, Courts and the justice system, Crime humor
Comments
The easiest answer here is yes, it should. I can understand people supporting rehabilitation, and I can understand there are shades of grey in every situation; HOWEVER, that's why City Council members are ELECTED... People should have a say in whether they want to be represented by someone with a criminal history.
What options are there for voicing opinions against this appointment? Is the hearing today or the vote on Monday open to the public?
Posted by: kateebee | January 6, 2011 9:57 AM
Well, hell no, why should something like that disqualify you from a seat on City Council? Jesus, you can't make this stuff up. The humor here is that this imbecile even presumes to this position.
Posted by: ruth | January 6, 2011 10:10 AM
Pete Welch is exactly the kind of guy who belongs in jail, not on the council.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 6, 2011 12:54 PM
He should be allowed to stand for election, along with all the other non-incumbent candidates. This appointment stuff just creates a pre-loaded incumbency, which leads to an encrusted class of permanent government officials.
Really, Agnes Welch is the one to be most upset with here, for resigning instead of serving out her term of office.
Posted by: Cheap Jim | January 6, 2011 1:03 PM
For one, the idea that a council person's son is an acceptable replacement, negating the need for a vote is absolutely ridiculous. Political elections where a spouse takes over for the deceased makes at least some sense (though I still believe not ideal) - the idea being (hopefully) that if they are married, they have similar drive and beliefs. But a family member? I think we all know that parenting can only do so much for how the character of a child will develop. We are each our own person, and many of us nothing like our parents.
I live in district 9, and I haven't heard the greatest things about his mother's accomplishments for the area. Why can't it just be opened for a reelection and made fair to the people?
Perhaps the response is that he would run unopposed? But in that case, yes, I believe that serious prior convictions, which show a lack of good character, should keep anyone from holding a political seat.
Posted by: Christina | January 6, 2011 1:50 PM
No, an arrest should not disqualify you, but a conviction should. Think about it. Anybody can be arrested for just about anything, even if innocent. In America, you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Posted by: VoiceOfReason | January 6, 2011 5:04 PM
Oh, and just to clarify: he plead guilty, so YES, he should be disqualified.
Posted by: VoiceOfReason | January 6, 2011 5:12 PM
An arrest should not disqualify someone, but a conviction/guilty plea should.
As for Mr. Welch - I do NOT want him representing me in my district. His mother left a lot to be desired. We need some new blood, someone who will really represent the needs of this district.
Posted by: avalon | January 6, 2011 5:41 PM