Still Dancing Around the First Amendment

Still Dancing Around the First Amendment

Town officials spoke first. Then just like a scene from a movie, up to the mike, came one lonely citizen. Central casting could not have been better at selecting just the right person to speak.

How did we get here. Last night’s meeting of the Bennington Select Board was more like a scene from Shirley Jackson’s ‘The Lottery’, than like a Norman Rockwell painting. ‘The Lottery’ was written in North Bennington, just a stone’s throw away from Bennington.  It is the story of how small town culture often results in prejudice against anyone who is different.

Rockwell was a famous Vermont artist. His painting of the man standing at a town meeting and exhibiting freedom of speech is a classic. It celebrates the First Amendment.

Last night’s meeting was held in the town fire house.  The fire house has an interesting history. It is the location where voting takes place. Also, pre-election debates and forums are sometimes held there.  Often, candidates who are not members of the democratic or republican party, are not allowed to participate.  During one of those forums, Dennis Steele, candidate for governor, stood outside. His First Amendment rights did not give him access that night.

On the agenda for last night’s meeting was a discussion about the proposed Anti-panhandler Law. The vote was delayed until November 11, but a discussion took place. All town officials spoke in favor of the law.  Their allegiance to the business community always trumps the needs of ordinary citizens. The economy is not good. Many local business owners are struggling.  Most citizens understand the importance of local businesses and are sympathetic. There are empty store fronts on Main Street. This is not just a Bennington problem. Main Street USA will never be the way it was during the Leave it to Beaver days.

Town officials spoke first. Then just like a scene from a movie, up to the mike, came one lonely citizen. Central casting could not have been better at selecting just the right person to speak. It was a bit reminiscent of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.  Ron Conroy, citizen, husband, father, veteran spoke with clarity and elegance.  He spoke on behalf of the disenfranchised… the poor, those in need of help. Bennington now had its own Mr. Smith.

A few other officials spoke. Then Conroy went back to the mike and made a very brief statement. He asked how a meeting that started with a Pledge to the flag could then go on to disrespect the Constitution by considering a law that would deny First Amendment rights to anyone.  Conroy was soft spoken and respectful, but that did not prevent one Board member from becoming visibly agitated. His anger at the citizen was very clear – and will have a chilling effect on citizen participation for a long time. Conroy remained cool and calm as he stood perfectly still in front of the angry official.  With grace and courtesy, Conroy firmly reminded him that he too was a veteran.

There are remaining questions.  

1  If someone on Main Street asks:  “Can you please help me? I need directions to the covered bridge.”  Would that be a violation of the proposed law?

2  If someone on Main Street asks:  “Can you please help me? I need a dollar.”  Would that be a violation of the proposed law? If so, would that be profiling? Would that be victimizing someone because of socio/economic class?

3 Would holding a sign that said: “Need ride to Albany” be a violation?  What about holding a sign that said: “Will work for food”?  

4  If this law is adopted, would it put Bennington taxpayers at risk?  What would be the likely result if the law was challenged in Court on Constitutional grounds?

The bottom line is this.  It appears that the law is under consideration because of a desire to make the poor invisible to tourists.  It has been stated that the poor create an ‘image’ problem.  Instead of hiding the poor, how about helping them.  The common belief is that there are ‘services’ for all who are in need.  That is a myth. Many in Vermont go without the essentials of life.  Homelessness is an issue – so much so, that recently some were considering putting up a tent city.  Today it was announced that a 59 unit Econo Lodge in Shelburne is being converted to house the homeless. Instead of hiding them, they are being helped in other locations.  Would that be a solution in Bennington?

The prejudice against the ‘lower class’ is very clear.  Some are poor through no fault of their own. One of the leading causes of bankruptcy is medical expenses.  A 2007 Harvard study showed that 60% of bankruptcies are due to medical expenses. 75% filing for bankruptcy had health care insurance.  Sometimes bad things do happen to good people.

A suggestion to the town leaders: Next time a panhandler asks for help, invite him out to lunch.  Maybe you will have a new understanding of the causes of poverty and also make a new friend.

Rosemarie Jackowski

22 thoughts on “Still Dancing Around the First Amendment

  1. … out of Ms. Jackowski’s repeated attempts here and elsewhere to portray the bigoted, secessionist candidate in the 2010 gubernatorial election as a martyr on the cross of victims of denial of their First Amendment rights.

    Thankfully, Jackowski did not once again repeat her usual assertion that Steele’s right to boorish behavior had been trampled upon when he’d been denied his “right” to crash a party primary forum, a party that he’d independently chosen to previously have no part of and a party that he’d publicly denounced.

    In the case that Jackowski vaguely alludes to, Steele had attempted to crash a debate that INDEPENDENT (and Jeezum Crow, that’s despite my intense dislike for ALLCAPS) media, whose First Amendment rights are clearly spelled out to not be subject to infringement by government or the whims of strident wannabe governmental ideologues such as Jackowski, who is a repeatedly, overwhelmingly failed would-be watchdog for such imagined transgressions in her nutso quest to become Attorney General.

    After years of crackpots who’d appeared in debates wearing arrow devices piercing their heads, waving egg cartoons, stringing beads behind their opponents and shouting obscenities, many media outlets (who foot the bills for the debates and take the heat for the crackpots) concluded that the Secretary of State’s definition of major party status might be a decent guideline for participation, not merely the ready cash to register and not mount a campaign other than the free coverage garnered by being an asshole.  I know I’m inviting a discussion of the whole major/minor party thing but, hell, if you can’t get 5% of voters to think your “party” has merit for any statewide office, given all the free media scrounged through stunts, why do you think you have the “right” to waste everyone’s time by claiming equal access to our collective attention and eyeballs?  We know where to find you if we’re looking for crazy.

    While the rest of Jackowski’s muddled post is a serious disservice to the important issue of homelessness, perhaps more egregious is her omission of the panhandling (yeah, that’s what she first started ramblin’ on about) ordinance:

    “The proposed ordinance addresses specifics like continuing to solicit from a person who has rejected the request, touching people or blocking their passage, and using violent, obscene or threatening gestures. continuing to solicit from a person who has rejected the request, touching people or blocking their passage, and using violent, obscene or threatening gestures.”

    Once again, Ms. Jackowski confuses the First Amendment right with the not protect right to accost whoever you fucking want to on the street, even if they want you to stop that shit!

    What. An. Ass.

  2. …must mean, in the end, going along with everything that makes for ‘panhandling’–what Sanders is talking about in his post.  Is Sanders a ‘crackpot’ too?  Here we have Bernie giving us the big picture behind what Rosemarie is talking about, but Rowley seems, in his comments, to DENY there is a link.  First Amendment rights?  What?  Only for those who suck up to the established Dem/Republican rule?–which is morally bankrupt and has economically AND morally bankrupted our nation.

    When all those who oppose this nation’s slide into Fascism are labelled ‘crackpots’ and dismissed in a priggish ‘country club’ way by people who ought to know better, then the BIG BAD BOYS win.  If you read Sanders post, you will see a ‘panhandling’ thread there too.  Namely, that Bernie is saying we have to ‘panhandle’ our government reps into doing the right thing for the growing legions of disadvantaged and working poor in our nation.  Should this message be silenced by removing the evidence from the streets?  Yeah–what poor people, Bernie?

    As far as Rowley’s personal assaults on Rosemarie, I find it utterly AMAZING that a courageous activist woman who went to court in 2003 over Bush’s war on Irag (for all of us) can be slandered so abusively on this site.  Rowley sounds like one of those right-wing Republicans in Congress Bernie was talking about.

    Is it ‘pandandling’ if a vet from Iraq/Afghanistan asks for help on the street because the VA screwed him/her over?  Maybe we should send all our homeless people to Afghanistan?  

    Is it ‘panhandling’ if I stand on the corner and ‘solicit’ signatures on a petition to put my name on the ballot?  And then, is it ‘panhandling’ to demand, as a candidate on the ballot, that I have a place in the Candidates’ Forum for that office?  Should we build more prisons for the homeless?  Is a MARCH and a RALLY ‘aggressive panhandling’?

    You know, it’s alright for GMD to be a platform for the Vermont Democratic Party–that was ‘intrinsic’ in its creation.  But, I think this site benefits from Rosemarie’s posts, and from other posts by people like wdh3 and Dave Van Deusen.  Are they ‘crackpots’ too?  And what about Bernie in his ‘crackpot’ early days as an Independent/Prog pounding away in Burlington?  Shit, if he’d been excluded or ‘marginalized’ as Rowley suggests some candidates ‘deserve’ to be, I guess today we’d have Senator Peter Smith representing us in D.C.  Or Senator ‘Rich’ Tarrant.

    Yes, it is ‘spooky’ when I read Rowley’s comments here.  I have to wonder what ‘class’ of people he thinks should hold office?  What ‘class’ of people should have First Amendment rights?  What ‘issues’ should be discussed on this site, and by whom?

    Thank you again, Rosie, for a ‘meaningful’ post on what’s really at stake down in Bennington.  Anti-‘panhandling’ laws are becoming like TASERS–which, of course, will be used on the panhandlers, and those that step in to defend them.  Then we can ban all Third Parties, cause they’ll never get enough signatures on petitions to be represented.

  3. …for the assholes who come to this site with their ‘denials’ and try to put ‘critical thought’ out on the street with the homeless.  You keep it up!  People need to hear your stuff.

  4. Buyer — beware.

    Cultural Dictionary

    Caveat emptor  ( kav eeaht, kah veeaht emp -tawr)]Latin for “Let the buyer beware.” It means that a customer should be cautious and alert to the possibility of being cheated[..

    How did I end up in the wilderness of religion. And why did it take me literally falling down a steep embankment, tumbling through thawed mud & snow to run into the restaraunt next door to call the police & report that my well respected but kinda strange (christian) husband had held me hostage for a few hours hurling me all over our home attempting to cast demons from my hellbound soul?

    Why did I not listen to family & friends who considered kidnapping me until I saw the dark path I was about to take?

    As I pondered what the hell happened, I recieved a valuable education. Though it may have been years I finally did wake the hell up.

     

  5. being bashed or are information and facts being questioned? If so, aren’t we all “bashed” sometimes by those who disagree with us? Anyone who brings it in the blogosphere does so at own risk. S/he who brings will likely be aggressively interrogated or disagreed with by someone. Why should anyone get a pass? I sure don’t & neither does anyone else.

    Contributing to blogs is not for the fainthearted!

    I sure hope no one thinks I’m in tears over being disagreed with if so oh well.

    Fight crime – shoot back!

Comments are closed.