clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Only a 13 year old could support I-91

Boy have Citizens for More Important Things sunk to new lows. I understand that their entire purpose is to cloud the issues regarding I-91 but in this case they go to an extreme by putting a 13 year old's name on their most recent heart-wrenching article.

Now I am not opposed to using emotions to draw people out to vote. At some point this season I can almost guarantee you will see my children out in public as I point to the fact that professional basketball is a family event. Young children and their needs and concern are a great motivator for the public.

That said I find this particular use of a child, writing an editorial piece on the issue to be a blatant disregard of the complexity and seriousness of the issues at stake. We are talking about a public policy which will limit the ability of elected officials with decades of experience to make decisions with full facts in front of them. In the case of Seattle civic leaders it may sadly be true that a 13 year old knows more than our council, but I find it in poor taste that they used this method to get their point across.

Additionally I find this forum an odd choice for the article they presented. The Business Journal is a publication which primary targets business owners and serious financial and political readers. In some sense I view this article as something of a concession in which I-91 proponents realized that they simply could not debate the issues and had to settle for a 13 year olds opinion.

In blatant self-promotion I have to point out that I am also featured in this weeks journal. Please pick up a copy. I'm sorry but I cannot print the full text here, give me a shout if you'd like an e-mail of the article.