Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

Photo courtesy of here.

The Charter Party was founded to fight government corruption in Cincinnati, and they did so by supporting the council-manager form of government, and by supporting Proportional Representation (PR).  Those are the cornerstones of the Charter Party.  Without them, there is no need for there to be a Charter Party, as nothing else signifies a reason for the group’s existence.  That’s why Chris Bortz’s total disprespect towards PR in a recent Enquirer article is so disturbing.  Usually, when people support something, they don’t appear in media making disparaging comments about it.  According to The Enquirer, “Councilman Chris Bortz, one of three Charterites on that reform commission, said PR could be ‘difficult to get people excited about it’ because it’s complicated.” But making disparaging comments comes naturally to a guy like Bortz, as evidenced by a recent email to The Cincinnati Beacon.

This morning, I received an unsolicited email from Councilmember Bortz.  It stated, at the top of the letter, that the contents were “not for publication.” Naturally, there is no legal obligation for me to follow that suggestion (since I never agreed to such terms before continuing our correspondence), but because I am a man of honor I will allow the message to remain private.  But I will share that it was not a very happy message.

So I wrote this:

You were quoted by the Enquirer insulting everyone’s intelligence.

But you raise a good point when you indicate that I should not take The Enquirer at face value.

I will gladly publish a formal apology if you would like to give me either some comments or an article showcasing your support of Proportional Representation—which would set the record straight from The Enquirer fallout.

Instead of setting the record straight, Bortz wrote back with another email that he hopes I will keep private.  I will, simply because (as I said) I am an honorable person.  Here is an excerpt of my next response:

You can, however, state unequivocally that you support PR and that you will vote against any move by Berding to implement a CEO-style mayor with districts for council elections.

But if you can’t make such statements in public, then for what exactly should I apologize?  Calling you a “Republican”?  That hardly seems like the worst thing a public figure could be called.  A joke about “The Facist Five”?  Give me a break.  Those are just goofy word games.

The real meat of this issue is whether you will continue to support PR, or whether you intend to vote with Berding.

If I’ve got you pegged all wrong on this one, your next message can prove that unquestioningly.  Then I’ll have no choice but to apologize in public and work to make atonement.

How did Bortz respond?  With a simple two sentence message.  Since it did not have a disclaimer, and since it was a partial answer to a direct question from someone the Charter Party considers a journalist, I take it as an on-the-record answer:  “I do support PR, you imbecil. Don’t ever email me again.”

(Yes, he spelled “imbecile” incorrectly, and I left it that way in his quote.  Naturally I’ve made spelling errors myself—they don’t really mean anything—but it is rather ironic given the nature of the word...)

I like the idea of PR.  So, if I were to talk to media, I would never say it is “too complicated,” or anything remotely like that.  I’d say, “It’s a really easy concept:  you rank your favorite candidates and your top choices have more weight.”

See how easy that was?  I don’t believe that people find the idea of “ranking” too difficult to comprehend.

And I don’t think the old-school base of the Charter Party are this dense, either.  I can’t imagine that the hard-core Charterites are very happy with Bortz right now.  (Maybe that’s why he got so angry with me—due to all the heat he’s been taking from people who usually give him big money contributions!)

If the Charter Party decides to leave its support of PR behind, and if it allows its endorsed candidates to disrespect the concept in media with no recompense, then the Charter Party has truly outlived its purpose.  Why does Cincinnati need a third party that doesn’t represent anything whatsoever?  That hardly makes any sense!

Thank you for reading (and printing from) The Cincinnati Beacon.