Gary Slossberg For LA City Council District 13

Today the Hollywood Studio District Neighborhood Council hosted a Candidates Forum at the Music Box. Although my opponent, Councilman Garcetti, said he would participate, he failed to show. Why is Garcetti so afraid to debate?

While the media often labels Garcetti as a “progressive,” this couldn’t be farther from the truth. A true progressive is principled and stands for open democracy. A true progressive would debate his or her opponent. A true progressive believes that money should not corrupt the political process. Yet, Garcetti has done everything in his power to avoid open political discussion. There is an extraordinary gap between his rhetoric and his acitons. A progressive, Garcetti is not.

I am not naive to the conventional political wisdom of not debating your challenger. However, our City needs leadership that does what is right, not what is politically oportunistic.

On March 3, I hope the voters of the 13th District send a powerful to Garcetti that enough is enough. It’s time that we get the type of principled, truly progressive leadership that our district deserves!

It has been an incredibly busy February! My efforts to get the media to pay attention have improved, although I am still looking for the LA Times and other media outlets to focus more attention on this race. So often, the print media and bloggers have characterized the candidacy of challengers as “long-shots.” This is disappointing, as the media should refrain from editorializing and let the voters make decisions themselves, once given the facts of the situation.

Here’s is a link to a recent NBC interview I did. I hope you enjoy it!

www.nbclosangeles.com/station/tv_channels/Politics_Raw_City_Council_District_13–_Gary_Slossberg_Los_Angeles.html#wTSZODzzAJwpxuhYfYfxipw15CoB

Hi:
Isn’t it amazing to read all about the finances raised by the incumbents? It look like as if THAT is all what is important. It is disappointing that none of the issues are being brought up.

All the talk about fundraisers makes me angry! Since when can a candidate’s seriousness of running for an elected position be measured by how much money he or she can raise? Doesn’t that take A LOT of time away from talking about the real issues that lay before us? Issues like parking, development, homelessness, JOBS!?

I guess going to school and receiving diplomas and achieving degrees does not mean anything as long as you can raise the money later to show how serious you are of putting your knowledge to work! - It also shows that having a respected “day-job” does not mean anything either, since raising money is more important.

Perhaps we can just all save the tuition for our children by not having them go to college, unless that college educates on “how to run a successful fundraiser”.

Jane Usher wrote in an e-mail to me that she and her friends “… support Carmen (Nuch) Trutanich for City Attorney. Based upon campaign dollars raised, Nuch is the only serious challenger to Councilman Jack Weiss …” – Again: What have dollars to do with merits, values, point-of-views? – Shouldn’t the raised amount of money be secondary if mentioned at all?

I thought we live in a democracy and we would like to teach others to be democratic, but all that is taught is that money changes everything, even a city election.

And here I thought that EDUCATION should be the one opening doors to anything!

This morning, I was happy to see Rick Orlov’s article in the Daily News regarding the various challengers in the City Council races (“LA council hopefuls press for change”). To date, little media attention has been paid to the challengers, despite the fact that many are running aggressive campaigns against the incumbent.

In the section focusing on my particular race against Garcetti, I was dismayed to read Garcetti’s explanation for why he won’t participate in a real debate with me:

“I think we should have back-to-back appearances, but I don’t want to get involved in anything direct-to-direct negative campaigning type thing,” Garcetti said.

What is negative about having a real debate, where we can respond to questions and engage with one another on the issues affecting the people? Garcetti has been in office for 8 years, and to think that his challenger would not want to question his positions throughout the course of his time in office is absurd. I would not be running against him if I agreed with his approach and policy positions. To say it’s negative to question his record is an attempt to stifle open dialogue.

It is not negative to disagree; in fact, political disagreement is one of the foundations of our democratic system. It is not out of bounds to ask about the contributions Garcetti has received from billboard companies and developers since these contributions very likely determine his policy positions. It is not far-fetched to want to know why he pushed through Prop B with little public dialogue and before disclosing the “secret report” to the public. The public should hear his explanation for supporting high-density developments, even when the developments displace the homes of low-income families and destroy rent control. I further want to know why he failed to agree to accept public matching funds from the City (which entails requiring him to participate in a debate), when he publicly touts his support for campaign finance reform. These questions, and many more, are all fair game, and I’m just scratching the surface.

The public has a right to know where both my opponent and I stand on the issues that affect them. I encourage everyone to contact Garcetti’s office and ask him to participate in a debate. The voters of the 13th Council District deserve it.