|
|
|
| |
|
Vol.
I No. 8 The Downfall of Mr. Cobb Editorials
At a minimum, these are misrepresentations that stretch the truth. David Cobb has been suspended from practicing law in Texas since 2003, which also happens to be well prior to his resignation as legal counsel for the Green Party of the United States. Cobb also resigned his post as a member of the National Committee of the GPUS last year, and holds no other offices on a state or federal level within the Green Party any related organization that can be found on the Internet. The only evidence of Cobb’s continuing involvement is his position on the Board of Directors of the Green Institute, a think-tank formed after his self-described "quixotic" run for President in 2004, which has received much of its funding from heavy hitter donors who typically can be found supporting a different political party. This supposed fountainhead of “practical, real-world solutions” have come up with vary little outside of creative ways of paying staff members, a task also performed with notable verve in Cobb’s fundraising on behalf of a recount of votes in Ohio, quite a bit of which went to pay the salaries of intimate associates. Cobb also failed to share the list of donors to his campaign with the local Greens, even though his disastrous “safe states” effort cost them votes in California and several hard-won ballot lines across the country, providing the most serious setback for any minor party since the near-total destruction of the Reform Party in 2000. At least the Reformers managed to grant their nomination to the candidate who received the most votes; Cobb finished fourth place in Humboldt County with scarcely one in ten supporting him in his supposed home county, behind write-in votes for Ralph Nader and even behind Lorna Salzman, who has never even been here. Only a convention well documented to have been rigged by delegations packed by Cobb who ignored the instructions of primary voters was able to hand him the nomination, and the consequent loss of millions of votes for the party (see Rigged Convention; Divided Party - How David Cobb Became the Green Nominee Even Though He Only Got 12 Percent of the Votes, published on Aug. 7, 2004 by Counterpunch). Other than asking for money or tooting his own horn while mischaracterizing his own record as one independent of the two-party system, we must ask how Mr. Cobb has paid his dues in this community. Even in the case of the Critical Mass ride instigated without the knowledge of event organizers at the hands of one of Cobb’s associates, what did a witness report was his chief concern on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse as four young protestors were locked away inside? Evidently Cobb was upset not with their treatment at the hands of overzealous police officers, but upset with the lack of unanimous support for his anti-corporate initiative, one his legal expertise seemed to play rather little, or perhaps too much influence in the drafting of, considering the many errors found by local attorneys as well as by editorials in the Times-Standard and The Eureka Reporter as well as the Humboldt Sentinel. Even given the fact that Cobb once was an attorney if he is no longer one now, where in his record can he point to having fought for the underdog? While insurance companies are as entitled to legal representation as any other entity, it was still Cobb’s choice to represent one for several years. The one task Cobb has found some success in recently, raising money, has yet to been employed by him on behalf of Critical Mass activists or other local causes he has taken sudden interest in. We are not the first to be completely disillusioned as to the manner in which David Cobb conducts himself, and while we resist speculation as to the motives, clearly some conclusions can be drawn and they do not bode well for the future of any organization Cobb is in control of. His downfall on the national scene should be an indicator of what Cobb’s further actions may entail locally. The Wrong Formula for Healthy Retail The Arcata City Council made the right move by shunting off into oblivion the absurd notion that a unique vote be held for each and every chain retail establishment that asks to do business in town. The bad idea factory that is Arcata's Committee on Democracy and Corporations will now have to actually engage with some very differently-minded public representatives from the Economic Development Commission, which may be difficult for the ACDC majority more used to taking their marching orders from Democracy Unlimited, the special interest group that proposed the creation of and continues to dominate that group. We’re confident in the ability of economic development supporters like Judith Little and Shaye Harty to reign in these more extreme impulses to come up with a more practical product. Indeed, the very nature of what Sean Armstrong, Ryan Emenaker and Michael Twombly have proposed seems to have escaped them. They were suggesting we set up the very process that our community suffered through with the 1999 attempt to build a Walmart outlet on the Balloon Tract in Eureka -- the prospect of a large corporation using the ballot box to completely circumvent and exempt themselves from the regulatory process governing land use. For Mr. Armstrong’s information, the Arcata Planning Commission is democratically run and appointed by the elected City Council. While not a perfect situation, it is certainly preferable to the mode of organization Democracy Unlimited would seem to prefer in practice. Forcing a vote on every new retail chain is effectively putting a ban on any new development by any business that isn’t local. While at least the formula restaurant law has a set number, allowing new fast food restaurants to replace ones that close down, the effect here would be to slowly wither away that sector of the Arcata economy, especially where it is concentrated at Valley West. It would be most refreshing for the financial brain trust on the Corporations Committee to tell us precisely how they plan to make up the sales tax revenue that this engine of Arcata’s revenues generates now. The Humboldt Sentinel hopes that further real-world sensibilities will be infused into the debate with the other good idea of Arcata Councilmembers, a Town Hall meeting, which is the kind of event that we could use more of in Humboldt County. We only hope the Council will reject the “fishbowl” method of organizing the debate, a design pushed by Corporations Committee members in order to limit public discourse and concentrate attention and speaking time in their own hands. It would be much preferable to see a return to the traditions of New England in this regard, with an assembly unencumbered by needless restrictions on public discourse. A Sign of Hope for Voter Confidence This last week saw a new branch of county government develop its first tender buds as the Election Advisory Committee sought to comprehend the enormity of its work in improving the local voting system. We commend those who are eventually chosen for this work and thank Supervisors Jimmy Smith and John Woolley for the rapt attention they gave to this complex subject. Our gratitude especially goes to Clerk/Recorder Carolyn Crnich for opening up the conduct of her office to such intense scrutiny, as well as to Elections Manager Lindsey McWilliams for finally admitting that touch screen voting machines have been found to have committed serious errors in vote counting. One of the less discussed topics at the EAC was the need to engage non-voters in the political process, although we note with hope its presence on their to-do list. We urge committee members not to rest on the laurels of relatively high voter turnouts in the 2004 elections, especially since elections this year did not fare so well: Our statewide special election in November saw just over half of registered voters cast a ballot, and remember that an average of one-third of eligible adult citizens are not registered. For Arcata’s special election in March, only 25% of registered voters turned out! Voters need to take local and off-year contests just as seriously as the big-ticket races, if not more so, since we have more influence over local government, hence the greater our responsibility. It is good to note as well that elections officials are no longer defending their relationship with the discredited Diebold corporation, but are now along with the rest of us grappling with what will replace their proposed touch-screen system. We urge Crnich and McWilliams to also question the use of their current AccuVote optical scan system and switch at the first possible opportunity to a system free of Diebold involvement. We also agree with election reform activist Dave Berman when he advises against working with Election System and Software considering their connection to prominent Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. The creation of the Humboldt Voters Association should also be a sign of maturity in a movement that can now afford to devote its energies in more specific campaigns. We look forward to reviewing their proposal to guarantee a majority winner for city elections in Eureka. Their efforts should not diminish the ongoing, valued work of the Voter Confidence Committee in pushing for systemic reform. Faith in our system of government and the integrity of our voting must begin at home. We look forward to this crucial community dialogue of interest to voters and non-voters of every political stripe. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2005-06, Humboldt Sentinel. All rights reserved. |
Yet
again in these last few weeks, David Cobb has taken his penchant for grandstanding
and misrepresentation to new heights with his recent dubious claims that
he is an attorney and a national political figure.