2 Prominent El Paso Dems Vote Against National Platform Issues at City Council

Gay rights and equality are part of the Democratic Party’s national platform. Plain and simple.

City Reps Holguin and Acosta voted against the Mayor’s agenda item to restore domestic partner benefits. 

They voted against retirees, they voted against social justice, they voted against the national platform of their party.

I for one, am personally disappointed in their votes. Yes, I know, Lilly and Robinson voted with them. Robinson has been against this from day one, so I am not surprised at his vote at all. Lilly had to pay back her masters, so I am not surprised by her vote.

But when the two flag-waving Democrats on council vote against a fundamental issue like equality, as a proud DEMOCRAT who stands by the principals of my party, I will not stand silent.

I know some of you agree with their vote. But save me the “Will of the People” nonsense. It’s not the will of the people, it’s the will of the small percentage of people that actually voted.

And stop with the ridiculous statements about Democracy coming to an end. Relax, there are no Chinese tanks in the Plazita, so stop being a bunch of drama queens.

Let me back up a bit for a moment.

Is this issue about healthcare benefits or homosexuality.

The reason I ask is because in the beginning, the reason we have this problem with the ordinance language is because the Pastor Tom Brown crowd didn’t want it to appear that they were singling out the gay community.

They were warned about the language in the ordinance. 

They didn’t care.

Multiple groups tried to meet with them to hash it out before it went to the ballot. The Browns wanted the language to stand. The matter went before the court and yes, Brown screwed everyone, not just the gays.

Yes, pun intended.

So the Mayor had a problem on his hand. A lot of people lost their benefits and the people who wrote the ordinance are now changing their story and saying that it was always about the gays.

If it was always about the gays, then the Mayor did the right thing by attempting to resolve the issue. The reason that the Browns wanted the broad language was to avoid the Constitutional problems of going after just the gays. So the situation is all screwed up.

So was it about benefits or was it about the gays? Now that this is a question, and since its impossible to find out from every voter what their individual intent was, then the Mayor was right to step in to attempt to fix the situation.

That is why the “will of the people” argument is total bullshit. You can’t possibly know what the “will of the people was”, benefits or gays, without checking with each individual voter.

Leadership means making the tough decision sometimes. It means making an unpopular decision sometimes as well too.

I know that some people don’t want to make the hard choice because they want to be popular or they don’t want to hurt their future chances at another office, etc. But don’t pull a Pontius Pilot and wash your hands of this and say leave it up to the voters just so that you don’t have to make a tough decision.

The public comment portion of the meeting was pointless by the way. All the city reps had their pretty little speeches ready to explain their vote. That means their minds were already made up and everyone basically wasted their breath, no matter what side of the issue they were on.

But what I find the most troubling about the “will of the people” argument is how disconnected with history those that hide behind that statement appear to be. The “will of the people” held African-Americans in bondage. The “will of the people” prevented women from voting. The “will of the people” said white people could sit at the front of the bus, drink from their own water fountains, swim in their own pools, and go to their own schools.

The “will of the people” crowd should not be ignorant of our nations past. The “will of the people” crowd should remember that part of Democracy means the protection of minorities from the tyranny of the majority.

Every meaningful change in terms of justice, and specifically the historical points I referred to, came about because brave leaders made unpopular decisions to do what is right.

I shudder to think what else those members of council would tolerate because of “the will of the people”. 

Actually a friend of mine on Facebook said it best, “To the three who changed their votes because "the voters" like discrimination: What other degrading acts would you be willing to do for "the voters"?

I wish those leaders acted more like Rosa Parks, brave and bold, and less like a park bench, passive and inanimate.

If you say you are a Democrat, act like it and don’t side with Pastor Brown. Don’t try to have your political cake and eat it too. Do what’s right, even if it means a few angry phone calls or emails. 

Others faced REAL threats and still had the courage to do what is right.