For the Future of PG County

From: "charnaylatashawashington"
Date: Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:08 pm
Subject: For the Future of PG County

Mr. Scroggins makes an erroneous assumption on the Prince George's County standing up to the executive on the matter of the PG County Hospital. If standing up to the PG County Executive means going back on an agreement because your cronies are not named to the State-County standing up to the County Executive, then please continue standing up while the medical indigents in PG County suffer. Sure, it is all well and good to grill and oversee the PG County Executive, that is the role of a Legislature, but do not sell me PG Council's cronyism over the needs of the poor in our county as principles.

Opponents of Proposition H raise the special interests. Isn't the Council's cronyism a special interest in itself. What about the Council Member who was denied $1.5 million in funding for parks and recreation just because this person supported the County Executive? Isn't that special interests? The two at-large members will represent the interests of the COUNCIL AS A WHOLE, and not the petty parrochialism that has been the rule in the Council ever since we reverted to the current system.

Furthermore, it is quite interesting that the proponents of Propositions F, G, and I forget mentioning that these were introduced by the County Council to counteract the possibility of the only proposition that was brought through a signature process
winning. In other words, let's make really sure that Proposition H never is implemented despite the will of the people by adding these three other questions. Where is the principle in that?

I am wholeheartedly in favor of H and I urge everyone to tell the "Gang of Six" fuggedabouit on F, G, and I.