Jim Dey: Those who don't vote are stuck with decisions made for them

Yahoo

05-02-2025

Feb. 5—Champaign City Council member Davion Williams said he wanted to spark a "conversation" when he posted a swastika on his social media site.
In that context, it's fair to ask: With whom and about what?
Here's one topic for discussion:
Just how ignorant about the history of World War II and the Holocaust does one have to be to post a swastika symbol on social media and not expect serious blowback?
Williams got the conversation he sought, but surely not the one he wanted, whatever that was.
It came mostly in the form of denunciations of his judgment, calls for him to resign and demands for an apology.
To which he initially responded, "I was just speaking, using my First Amendment right to say what I want. ... Why do I need to resign for making a statement? People have said far worse than that."
They surely have.
But the First Amendment's free speech guarantee does not immunize speakers from responsibility for the words and symbols they use or others' angry denunciations.
It wasn't long before Williams was singing a different tune, this one in the form of an apology issued three days later. That, of course, raises another question:
Just how sincere is a shotgun apology?
Not being mind readers, the public will have to take Williams at his word while remaining mindful that his "swastika" moment followed on the heels of antisemitic comments he made at a city council meeting. He apologized for them, too.
Williams wrestles with big ideas, but he doesn't overburden himself with the necessity of actually understanding them. Consequently, he doesn't stick just his foot in his mouth, but his entire leg.
That leg ought to render him mute for a while. But he'll return. Those who don't know what they don't know invariably do.
In the meantime, here's another question to consider, one some people might prefer to avoid:
Who's responsible for the Williams show?
He's obviously responsible for what he says and does. But who gave him the municipal platform he uses to shape municipal policy on dozens of important local issues and address issues about which he knows little?
The voters, in their sometimes non-infinite wisdom, did.
Williams got elected in 2021, defeating incumbent Clarissa Nickerson Fourman, in one of those municipal elections where hardly any eligible voters bothered to cast a ballot.
Williams picked up 122 votes, Fourman 99, Azark Cobbs 32.
Under our system, the candidate who gets the most votes wins, even if the most votes reflect a relative handful. That doesn't reflect majority rule, but majority-of-those-who-bother-to-vote rule.
Champaign and Urbana have municipal elections coming soon — a Feb. 25 primary and an April 1 general election.
There are all kinds of low-profile but important issues on the ballot.
In the primary, Urbana will be, for all intents and purposes, electing a mayor, and there are two contested races for the city council.
In the April 1 general election, there are dozens of township, municipal and school board elections.
They will determine public decisions made in the next two to four years, and they matter. They also may give public platforms to people like Williams.
By the way, he's running unopposed. That's more proof people get the government they deserve.