Ed Coleman is a City-Councilor for the city of Indianapolis. We recently reported here, that Coleman had left the Republican Party for the Libertarian Party. It seems the Republican, and Democratic, Parties see a threat in Mr. Coleman and have now stripped him of his seniority and committee seats. The following is a press release from the Indiana Libertarian Party:
INDIANAPOLIS, IN – (March 3, 2009) — Out of the political need for retribution, and to send a message that stepping outside the old ‘two party system’ monopoly will have consequences, the City County Council’s Democrat and Republican leadership decided Monday to remove Ed Coleman from all committees. With numerous supporters of Councilor Coleman present, the decision was made in an “executive session” that prevented public comment.
Coleman was appointed to the Rules and Public Policy Committee and the Economic Development Committee at the beginning of the year. Now that he has publicly changed his affiliation to the Libertarian Party, a move that represented a clear warning shot to the old two-party power structure, they are using Councilor Coleman to send a warning to others.
Coleman was disappointed in the lack of imagination and statesmanship shown by Council leaders. “They can pretend we don’t exist, but the Libertarian Party is on the ballot in Indiana,” said Coleman. “The voters deserve to have my voice heard. If the rules are not clear enough for the Council leadership, then maybe we need to change the rules. Shutting us out of the process only proves that ‘open and honest dialogue’ is not really welcomed. I left the Republican Party because they have consistently put the Republican Party above the Indianapolis taxpayer.”
LPMC Chairman Timothy Maguire also expressed his disappointment at the decision. “Clearly, Councilor Coleman was deemed fit to serve on these committees a few weeks ago but this isn’t the first time political gamesmanship has overtaken common sense,” said Maguire. “The Libertarian Party is here to stay, and Ed Coleman is guaranteed to be on this body for three more years. It would have made more sense for the Council to work on being inclusive rather than fretting about how to dissuade anyone else who might stand up against entrenched political machinery. In 2007, the Republicans promised a more fair and open City government, and this is certainly the opposite of that promise to Indianapolis taxpayers.”
“I am also disappointed that Council President Cockrum wasn’t willing to take any public comment on the matter by putting the meeting into Executive Session,” continued Maguire. “I find it troubling that the Council leadership wasn’t interested in hearing public opinion. Councilor Coleman was only allowed to defend his position after significant arm twisting. The Marion County Republican Party is showing the same hubris the Democrats exhibited in 2007, and easily explains why a two-party system is broken. The Parties and their friends win, and the taxpayer loses.”
I do think this development is very welcome. It sets the Demolishers and Repugnants as the heavies and Coleman as the victim. You cannot expect the political establishment to grant political authority to people who are standing in opposition to the establishment.
It should be great publicity for Coleman.
Oh, my bad. Alright.
Trent,
My mistake. I should have been more clear with my post. Makes it difficult since I can’t edit on here and I always make mistakes.
I hope the people vote out the Republicrats who stripped Coleman of his seats. I said it is unlikely due to the apathy of most people.
Since Paulie brought it up, it occurred me a bit to late to note:
One thing I’ve noticed that a lot of social conservatives never consider on the topic of same sex marriage, until talking to libertarians, is the idea of just getting the government out of it completely.
Why try to use government to force or restrict something that is a religious practice. It would require some adjustments to other laws that reference marriage, but I’m always surprised when people of faith want the government to take marriage over from the church. I can think of no worse place to put anything that someone desires to ‘protect’.
Paulie –
Coleman is a veteran and personally is a social conservative but has stated publicly that he doesn’t agree with using the government to try and force his beliefs on others. He specifically addressed it in his press conference on February 17.
Link to audio is included here: http://www.lpin.org/node/614
Someone in SC told me that Coleman is a social conservative. I don’t remember who. I didn’t really get a chance to talk to Coleman personally. Does anyone know more about this?
I am tired of hearing Republicans try and woo Libertarians with claims of “retake the party”. Retake to what? What it only was perhaps two or three times in history (Goldwater and Reagan era? and Reagan by words only not deeds and deficits).
Reagan: not even that much. Even his talk was always jingositic/militaristic and socially reactionary, thus he was only vague libertarian in rhetoric on one of three broadly defined axes.
Goldwater, at least, was somewhat socially liberal in his later years.
Both the Democratic and the Republican parties are completely devoid of any redeeming qualities. However, the GOP is particularly detestable because it pretends to be something it is not when really all it is Democrat-light.
I don’t live in Indy, but I hope every single of the councilmen that voted for this act of tyranny are completely thrashed at reelection time.
With all due respect to IndyErnie, the age of partisan tribalism must come to an end. Just as there are Democrats who will blindly vote for any Democrat candidate and believe their party does no wrong, there is a large contingent of Republicans who feel the same. This is serious business, not something to be approached with a sense of nostalgia.
The suggestion that Democrats are the only problem completely overlooks the insider dealings that the Republicans undertake. It overlooks failure to properly restrict government to not include things like ‘socialized football’ and sports stadiums, increases in taxes to pay for such and an incompetent lack of planning and oversight relative to ongoing expenses.
I am tired of hearing Republicans try and woo Libertarians with claims of “retake the party”. Retake to what? What it only was perhaps two or three times in history (Goldwater and Reagan era? and Reagan by words only not deeds and deficits).
IF they want to see their party become something what they wish to be but which it never has been except in a few isolated examples of statesmanship, then perhaps they should help the Libertarian cause gain traction so that it provides more incentive for the failing Republican party to become a force for good instead of a force for big talk and no action.
Six years holding all the cards and getting ABSOLUTELY NOTHING done was enough to convince me that they don’t mean it.
You hope people vote Coleman out? Really?
Trent,
I think the Dems and Republicans are arrogant enough to believe the people won’t vote for a 3rd party or even care enough to not vote them back into office. I think they have the apathy pretty much correct, but I hope I’m 100% wrong and the people vote him out.
There will be blowback from this…
Let us not forget this event and the rest that I am sure will follow suit.
@#10 – If the libertarians join the republicans in a partisan fight against the democrats (Obama on the national level), the libertarians (and by extension liberty!) will be finished.
If the Libertarian Party truly believes that Coleman is the minority then they should put their money where their mouths are and petition for acceptance.
I believe that Coleman turned his back on every republican who voted for him but I have no problem with Coleman being the minority. He is the only libertarian on the council so… I believe he is the minority, however the democrats might think differently.
The fight isn’t with the R’s its with the D’s. The Libertarians need to take the fight there or shut up.
derkel,
Pay–sure. I assumed he’d lose his next race, raise no money, be completely ineffective at the Council–but stripping of his committee seats is a great way to invite backlash.
Trent,
Was it really? I was under no illusions that the man would not pay for his choice to move away from the two parties.
It’s a little unexpected….
Sad, but not unexpected. Hopefully the voters show their displeasure with the partisan decisions when it comes election time. Although I highly doubt that happens.
…Sad.
@Trent: I believe the Republicans tried to get the Democrats to give up spots for Ed. The Democrats, I think rightly in fairness to them, declined.
The real solution is to ensure that EACH minority party gets representation on boards if they chose such.
has this been reported in the local media yet? I hope the Indiana LP can make a big stink over this and make the city council look like the thugs they are.
http://digg.com/politics/Libertarian_City_Councilor_loses_seniority
The fact that the Democrats and Republicans voted together to strip him of his seats says something.