Good Government, Green and Simple

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments (4)

  Page 1 of 1 pages

  Mr Schaeffer unwittingly makes the case that Greens and all liberals, such as San Francisco’s board member Matt Gonzalez, fail at governing because of an unwillingness to grasp or admit simple tried and true concepts like the law of supply and demand.  Mr Gonzalez’ idea of increasing the minimum wage to 8.25-8.75 throughout the city of San Francisco will drive employers out of the city.  Denver several years ago raised the minimum wage in the city to 7.50 The result now is that the Denver leaders are trying to increase public transportation from the urban core to the suburbs to transport all the service workers to their jobs as new business have located outside the municipal boundary and existing ones have moved.  San Francisco is in for the same increase in urban to suburban commuting as entrepreneurs choose the cheaper labor costs of the ring over the core.  Those such as Mr Gonzalez and Mr Shaeffer who refuse to accept or recognize such common logic continue to marginalize themselves in increasingly conservative America. 

  Posted by Carl Snodgrass on Feb 25, 2003 at 10:50 PM

  Matt is an inspiration to everyone in San Francisco who believes in social justice and integrity.  He is a model for the honest politician.  Contrary to the previous comment, Matt’s point is this: businesses move out of a city after the city has burned all it’s money on tax breaks and perks for big business, leaving the residents with a city they no longer want, or can afford, to live in. The residents leave, and then finding employees becomes too difficult for these companies, so they move on to suck the next city dry.

  Posted by Paul Platt on Feb 26, 2003 at 1:21 PM

  The ascension of Matt Gonzalez to Board President in this city dominated by the Willie Brown Democrat Machine was a miracle, and definitely the best thing to happen to San Francisco in years.  Many people have many opinions on why Matt was chosen for this honor by his colleagues, but one simple fact explains the mystery:  Matt knows how to work with people.  His skills at negotiation and thorough understanding of the issues important to the city made him the natural choice, transcending the partisan bickering, power-mongering, and petty disputes that all too often gum up the workings of city government.

  Posted by Randy Zurcher on Feb 26, 2003 at 2:38 PM

  Hello Brett,
  I recently discovered this article and thought I would clarify something.  I was probably the person who sent Matt Gonzalez the correspondence about the Progressive Republican precedent.  Franck Roberts Havenner was elected to the SF Board of Supervisors in 1925 as a protege of Hiram Johnson.  At the time, he was indeed a member of the progressive wing of the Republican Party.  However, in 1934, Havenner, who had been reelected continually since his initial election, revived the Progressive Party in California and re-registered as a Progressive.  He did this because of the fear that conservative Republicans would run a candidate against Johnson (who was a U.S. Senator then) and defeat Johnson in the primary.  If that had been the case (it wasn’t), Johnson could re-register with the Progressives and still be in the race.  Havenner stayed with the Progressives for the next few years.  In 1935, he ran for president of the Board of Supervisors, and, like Matt, won with a bare majority despite the fact that he belonged to a third party.  I read somewhere that Matt remarked, “This wasn’t supposed to happen,” after his victory, and it was much the same for Havenner.  In 1936 he then ran for Congress as a Roosevelt New Dealer.  He got the endorsement of the Democratic County Central Committee (despite the fact that there was a Democratic candidate running) and defeated the popular incumbent, Republican Florence Kahn.  In 1939, Havenner switched to the Democratic Party.  There’s more, but I wanted you to see the parallels between this third-party fellow and Matt.
  Sue Vaughan

  Posted by susan vaughan on Mar 23, 2003 at 12:58 AM

  Page 1 of 1 pages

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also by Brett Schaeffer

• A School Behind Bars
  
• The Accidental Conservationist
  
• Chile’s Media Watchdog
  
• Good Government, Green and Simple
  
• School Choice
  Planned Parenthoods look local
• Minority Reporter