Albuquerque’s crisis of democracy

When the Rio Grande Foundation spoke out against the actions of the Environmental Improvement Board recently, we were always careful to express our opposition to the process itself. Unelected boards should simply not be in the business of making major policy decisions in a democratic republic system of government.

Fast forward to this week when City Council in Albuquerque over-road Mayor Keller’s veto of what we believe were some necessary reforms to that Board put forth by Councilor Dan Lewis.

Now, as the Albuquerque Journal editorialized this morning (Thursday), the Board has refused to obey Council and has exhibited “appalling insubordination.” Sadly, Mayor Keller not only directly rebuffed the Journal’s call for him to exert leadership in this situation has instead made the following tweet which is both breathtaking in its lack of judgement and shocking in its ignorance about they WAY city government works.  It might be time to dust off that “weak mayor” concept once again at least if Keller has designs on a third term.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 Replies to “Albuquerque’s crisis of democracy”

  1. A crisis of democracy is when we have fake electoral representatives trying to overthrow the vote of the people. A crisis of democracy is when we are facing possible re-election of a man facing multiple criminal and civil cases and who is already been convicted for rape along with numerous other financial scams. It is disgusting but not surprising that you call a political disagreement in Albuquerque a crisis of
    democracy.

    1. When an unelected board and Mayor refuse to abide by a duly passed policy from an elected council that governs the City, that is the very definition of a crisis of democracy. The fact that the “only” crisis you see involves Trump shows you to be more anti-Trump than concerned about democracy.

    2. Of whom, pray tell, do you speak? Someone in your view “innocent until accused”? That fits lots of people. You appear as a hater, established in the 1960s, and allowed to speak, generally in error/ignorance.
      NO appointed Board or office EVER should be permitted opportunity to override the elected body. We often see this at the Federal level; e.g. EPA. No, the SCOTUS does not fit the model; it is Constitutionally in existence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.