[Mpls] RE: Rep. Kahn Obstructing Democracy???

[Michael Atherton]

Chuck Holtman wrote:

> But in a legislature intent on malicious damage to the
> state and the urban core, Rep. Kahn still is overwhelmingly 
> a progressive voice (though not entirely, as many have posted 
> here).  I'm not going to cut off my nose to spite my face by 
> demanding ethical purity in the personal world of my 
> representative.

> The broader point here is how successful the Right has been 
> in framing ethics as relating to personal weaknesses.  
> Character is condemned for peccadillos, while pushing legislation 
> that ravages the public interest for the benefit of an ideology 
> or a well-heeled few, and communicating in a systematically 
> dishonest way with the public in order to keep them hoodwinked, 
> never seem to fall within the realm of ethical judgment.

Bill Kahn wrote:

> I've not seen much nor asked about the reasons or motivation 
> for Kahn's actions, but I suspect, aside from absent mindedness, 
> it was curiosity and a desire to further disseminate the literature; 
> had there been extras on a doorstep here or there, it would have 
> been a stretch to call it a crime.

Jeremy Wieland wrote:

> As to why I would vote for Phyllis this go around, (I'm in the wrong
> district, Go Diane!) aside from her legislative history, I would consider
> this particular infraction of the law to pale in comparison to the
> Republican Party platform. 

Steve Cross wrote:

> The reaction of some to Rep. Kahn's "crime" brings to mind the 
> old statement about making a "federal case" out of something 
> very petty.  And those who are making a big too-do out of this 
> are making a VERY big deal out of something that's very petty.

Dyna Sluyter wrote:

> We need to put things in perspective here- a few bits of 
> litter left behind by Republican lit droppers and a politicly 
> unattributed rumored restructuring of NRP are nothing compared 
> to the Republican's current shenanigans....

Chris Johnson wrote:

> Most politicians are gaming or are attempting to game the system to 
> gain power.  Where's the outrage?

Jim Bernstein wrote:

> Lets not breathe - or espouse - too much of this rarified and purified
> air!  I do not care what political pedestal one wants to stand on but
> Rep. Kahn's transgression is hardly "obstructing democracy"!  
> More like going 33 mph in a 30 mph zone.  A violation yes, but not 
> one that is going to threaten the safety or security of the republic.  

Sometimes little things matter.  I suppose that I took Ms. Kahn's
violation personally because I'd been faced the same temptation and
made a difference choice.  A couple of years ago I ran for school
board.  While out fliering, I came across a DFL flyer supporting
their endorsed candidates for the school board.  I hadn't seen it
and I was really curious about what information it contained.
I thought about taking it, but didn't.  Why?  Because I thought
that it would be unfair to whoever lived at that address.  It might
have been the only information that they received other than mine.  
They might have DFL supporters and had been waiting for the information 
so that they would know who to vote for (not everyone does a lot of 
research about school board candidates).  So, I didn't take it, even 
without the knowledge that it would have violated the law.

So what went through Ms. Kahn's mind when she removed several flyers
from people's doorsteps?  Being a longtime legislator my best guess
is that she must have known that it would be a criminal act. Was it
just a strategic decision to aid her party or did she believe, as 
many of the posters above, that a minor wrong is justified in the face 
of a greater evil? That's the major problem here:  How can you possibly
believe so righteously in your cause that you are willing to intrude on 
the right of others to make an informed decision in a free democratic 
process?  How can you believe so righteously in your cause that you are 
willing to excuse the behavior of someone who takes away the right 
of another person to make such a choice in a free and democratic society?
It is their right! I  believe emphatically that this is an issue of fundamental importance. Ms. Kahn was intruding on the ability of
others to exercise
their most fundamental right of making an informed choice in a democratic 
society.  I don't care if the Republicans do it; I don't care if the 
Greens do it; I don't care if the Nazis do it: it's wrong and anyone who 
wants to represent their fellow citizens in our government should know that 
it's wrong. 

What I find most disturbing is that Ms. Kahn's ethics don't seem to be
much different than those of many people in my community who seem to 
believe that once you've determined what goals need to be accomplished 
whatever methods you use to achieve them are justified: lie, cheat, 
slander, steal; it's the outcome that determines the morality of your 
acts.

I suppose in the past that I've been too isolated from politics and the 
middle-class to realize that such values are widely held and accepted.  
It is very disheartening to find greater dignity among those who have 
less in our society, than those who have more.    

Michael Atherton
Prospect Park