🚀 go-pugleaf

Letter from the 11th Congressional District Democratic Committee-Virginia
Concerning Decline of Democracy in Washington Post circulation area

February 20, 1996

Geneva Overholser
Ombudsman
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street NW
Washington, D. C. 20071

Dear Ms. Overholser:

     Last night at our committee meeting we discussed the policies of the 
Washington Post, and afterward I decided to write to you to call your 
attention to the problems we talked about.

     Our committee is made up of leaders of the Democratic Party at the grass 
roots level in Fairfax County, Fairfax City and Prince William County, 
Virginia.  We all serve as volunteers, and I dare say the motivation of most 
of us is a desire to make our democratic system work.

     At our meeting we discussed the behavior of your newspaper in relation to 
our Congressman, Rep. Thomas Davis.  For the past year we have been sending 
releases to your paper pointing out the policy positions of Mr. Davis, 
especially where we think he has gone wrong.  Not a single one of our policy 
papers has been covered in your newspaper, rather the news coverage of the 
paper seems to track the editorial endorsement of Davis made at the end of the 
1994 campaign.

     With the approach of the 1996 election, persons who have considered 
becoming a candidate, including me, have cited as their chief reason not to 
put their names forward the obvious bias of your newspaper in favor of Davis, 
and the unwillingness of the Post to cover the point of view of the opposition 
political party in this district.

     At this point it is possible that there will be no candidate willing to 
undergo the rigors of a campaign in this situation.  Which brings me to my 
point-  when we are no longer able to field candidates because they do not 
believe they will receive fair treatment in your newspaper, we do not have a 
functioning democracy in the circulation area of your newspaper.  I hope in 
your next series on the decline of American public life you will analyze your 
own share of the responsibility for this condition.

     Does the Washington Post in fact care about the health of the political 
system, as is professed in some of your analysis pieces?  In the local area 
where you have the most impact in our recent experience you have not been a 
positive force in creating a better situation.

     Let me set out my vision for what a newspaper in a democracy should be 
doing.  I believe you should cover the issues raised by the major political 
parties in this area when they merit public discussion, and not just cover 
campaigns like a horserace as is the rule in local political coverage.

     Among the issues we have raised and have been ignored by the Post, and 
the dates of the releases:

     Dec. 13, 1994-  Questioning the conflicts inherent in Davis serving as 
chair of the D. C. subcommittee and representing a suburban Washington 
district.

     Feb. 22, 1995-  Calling for attention to Northern Virginia transportation 
needs in the new Congress.

     March 27, 1995-  Calling for restoration of funding for the Air and Space 
Museum annex at Dulles.

     April 4, 1995-  Calling for Davis to reject Gingrich cuts in social 
services while increasing defense and intelligence funding.

     May 18, 1995-  Calling for Davis to reject federal pension changes 
resulting in reduced benefits.

     June 14, 1995-  Against a lower tax rate in D. C. citing effect on local 
economy.

     August 4, 1995- Criticism of Davis vote to cut environmental enforcement, 
deny abortion in cases of rape and incest, and cut social safety net.

     October 20, 1995-  Criticism of Davis vote for Medicare cutback as part 
of Gingrich budget plan.

     October 27, 1995-  Criticism of Davis vote for Gingrich budget bill which 
included a tax cut Davis had promised to oppose.

     January 5, 1996-  Criticism of the stopgap spending plan for leaving out 
funding for government contractors.

     January 31, 1996-  Criticism of Davis for raising special interest PAC 
money throughout his first year in Congress while voting on measures affecting 
those special interests.

     Does the Post think that these issues are not worthy of discussion, 
especially in relation to the positions of the local Congressman?  If so I do 
not believe the Post is a newspaper serving a responsible role in a democracy.

     My hope would be that the Post would facilitate a discussion of issues by 
the major political parties, because it is through such a discussion of issues 
that democracy works.  Coverage would encourage candidates to come forward 
knowing that at least they could make an argument for their candidacy, without 
needing to raise large amounts of special interest money.

     Should the situation occur in which we do not have a candidate for 
Congress in the 11th District, I intend to explain to all concerned, 
especially the voters, that the inability to have a discussion of issues in 
the Post has taken away the reality of a functioning democracy in our area.

                                                         Sincerely,


                                                          Daniel S. Alcorn
                                                          Chairman
                                                          11th Congressional 
District                                                               
Democratic Committee


Postscript-  The reporter assigned to cover these issues on Feb. 22 stated 
that he had received all of the releases in question but decided not to cover 
them, because "that's the way it works".      

-- 
Lisa Pease
----------
"If you can't get the truth about the past, how can you expect to get the 
truth about the present?" 
                            - Jerry Brown, We The People talk show 1/11/96
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the Real History Archives  http://www.webcom.com/~lpease