In the Sept. 10 DC Primary
Thursday, August 29, 2002; Page A30
DISTRICT DEMOCRATS have an easy decision
when it comes to the selection of a delegate to the House of
Representatives and a chairman of the D.C. Council in the Sept. 10
primary. Both incumbents, as testament to their outstanding records of
service and strength among the voters, are running unopposed in their
party primary. In addition, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton faces only
nominal opposition in the Nov. 5 general election, and Council Chairman
Linda W. Cropp will enter that contest unchallenged as well. That is as
it should be. Mrs. Norton and Mrs. Cropp are highly deserving of
reelection.
Mrs. Norton has been everything District residents could want in a
representative on Capitol Hill. It is not her fault that she lacks a
vote on the House floor or that the District is not represented in the
Senate. Mrs. Norton has made the best of her unfortunate nonvoting
status, using her considerable legislative and negotiating skills to
tirelessly advance the District's interests in both houses of Congress
and with the leadership of both parties.
On the local front, we think the D.C.
Council has arrived under the leadership of Linda Cropp. It is now a
more cohesive and credible legislative body that takes a businesslike
approach to the city's problems and challenges. Credit pragmatic Linda
Cropp with directing that transformation. Many of the council's
successes are the result of her work behind the scenes. The mayor owes a
good deal of his legislative achievements -- and escapes from defeat --
to Mrs. Cropp and her ability to quietly find common policy ground on
which the executive and city lawmakers can stand. Given the financial
and social challenges confronting the District, Mrs. Cropp's leadership
on the council and Mrs. Norton's presence in Congress will be needed
more than ever.
The decision in the Democratic primary
for at-large council member is much more difficult. Four years ago, we
endorsed real estate lawyer Beverly Wilbourn, a newcomer to D.C.
elective politics. We found her to be bright and vibrant with strong
business skills and a sensitivity to grass-roots interests that would
make her an asset on the council. Today, we regard Ms. Wilbourn, who is
running again, in much the same way. What's missing, however, is a
strong record of sustained and broad city service during the intervening
years. That is disappointing because Ms. Wilbourn strikes us as having
many of the qualities needed in public office -- honesty, intelligence
and a dedication to people, especially the underserved. The incumbent,
Phil Mendelson, while more understated and less noticeable in a crowd,
has nonetheless been an active council member on the dais and in the
community. He does his homework, diligently attends to his legislative
duties and keeps long hours in behalf of his constituents. He does have
a tendency to make tasks look more difficult than they are -- he handled
the council's redistricting chores with far more angst than Mrs. Cropp
exhibited 10 years ago. And we don't agree with all of his decisions,
such as on Klingle Road, which we favor reopening. But Mr. Mendelson
has compiled a record of credible service on the council that cannot be
discounted.
A third at-large candidate, school board
member Dwight E. Singleton, is long on ambition and sloganeering but
woefully short on substance and ability. In a close call between Beverly
Wilbourn and Phil Mendelson, the incumbent gets the nod.
2002
The Washington Post Company
|