David Catania
Republican Party
Candidate in Special Election for Council At-LargeElection Date: Tuesday, December 2, 1997
Richard J. Rosendall
President
Gay & Lesbian Activist Alliance
P.O. Box 75265
Washington, D.C. 20013-5265
Dear Rick:
Accompanying this letter, please find my responses to the Gay and Lesbian Activist Alliance of Washington’s Questionnaire for At-Large Council Candidates regarding the December 2nd Special Election.
Since GLAA’s founding in 1971, gays and lesbians have made much progress in the District. However, as we all know, we still have a long way to go. As an openly gay man, I am particularly sensitive to the issues raised by your questions because they impact my life directly. I view my candidacy as part of the journey to full equality and acceptance of the gay and lesbian community.
In addition to my responses, I have appended a copy of a law review article that I wrote entitled The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights And Sodomy Laws: A Federal Common Law Right To Privacy For Homosexuals Based On Customary International Law. This article represents approximately six months of effort and has been widely cited in subsequent law review articles concerning gay issues.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
David A. Catania
- Congress has recently stripped the Council of many of its basic home rule duties and responsibilities. In light of the Council’s greatly diminished role, why are you running for the Council?
I am running for the Council because I believe that I have the skills and integrity to serve the citizens of this city. As an optimist, I prefer not to focus on the powers that the Council lacks, rather on the powers the Council retains. Under the enabling legislation that created the Control Board, home rule will be restored once the city balances its budget for four consecutive years. Last summer, the Council produced a balanced budget and started the clock ticking. Now the Council must focus on repeating this task three more times. If elected, I would be committed to accomplishing this task and restoring the full powers to Council.
As Chairperson of the Sheridan-Kalorama Advisory Neighborhood Commission, I currently preside over an organization that has little real power and almost no money. Yet, through the force of my personality, I have been able to accomplish a number of very important goals.
I am proudest of my efforts at improving the public safety in my ANC. Specifically, I have worked very hard to encourage the Metropolitan Police Department and the Uniform Division of the Secret Service to coordinate and expand their efforts. (Incredibly, when I was first elected to the ANC, the officers in charge of my ANC from these respective police forces did not even know each other.) In addition, I have encouraged greater communication and interaction between these two police forces and the community. Due in part to these efforts, my ANC has experienced a dramatic drop in crime. According to the statistics provided by the Metropolitan Police Department, crime is down almost 50% over the same period last year.
This success can be duplicated across the city even without the help of the Uniform Division of the Secret Service or other federal law enforcement agencies. At present, less than 46% of D.C.’s police officers (1,600 of 3,500) are assigned to the streets. By comparison, New York City’s Community Policing model assigns 80% of its officers to the streets. We can make our streets safer, if we simply make better use of our resources.
The lesson to be learned from this illustration is that success is often more a function of hard work, efficient use of resources, and determination than absolute power. Thus, notwithstanding the reduced power of the City Council, I am confident that I can be a force for positive change.
- Do you agree with GLAA that our own elected officials bear much of the blame for our diminished home rule powers?
Yes. After more than two decades of home rule, our elected officials have demonstrated one overriding concern: self-preservation. For years, in an effort to secure their political success, our elected officials have made promises and commitments that we could not afford. In the wake of this destructive fiscal behavior, our leadership has resorted to making excuses rather than finding solutions.
Our city has the talent and resources to be a model for the world. Yet, notwithstanding the fact that our city government spends over $8,200 per person, our government is unable to educate our children, provide safe streets, or meet the needs of our most disadvantaged citizens.
In my opinion, we need to take a hard look at the current structure of the D.C. government and determine what changes need to be made in order to ensure better government in the future. Among other ideas, I am proposing the following:
First, I am advocating the creation of the Office of Attorney-General for the District of Columbia. Under my proposal, the Attorney-General would be elected by the people and would be responsible for prosecuting violations of D.C. law currently prosecuted by the Office of Corporation Counsel. Additionally, I propose empowering the Attorney-General to establish an Office of Public Integrity, which would aggressively prosecute theft and abuse within the D.C. government. I contend that the absence of an independent prosecutor within our city’s system of government has contributed to the undoing of home rule. Part of the City Council’s focus must be on deciding how to reform and improve home rule. Simply stating that it is flawed does not equate to making it better.
Second, I propose requiring competitive bidding on city contracts. In the last two years, only 50 percent of city contracts have been awarded on a competitive basis. As a result, citizens do not get the most value for their tax dollars. In addition, by forcing competitive bidding on city contracts, we can begin the process of rebuilding trust with our population, which has grown cynical from the repeated stories of cronyism and self-dealing by our government officials.
- The Council has seldom aggressively exercised its oversight powers over the District government and has been too passive and reactive in addressing the mismanagement problems that routinely plague our city’s administration. What will you do to improve the Council’s performance of its oversight responsibilities?
There can be no doubt that the Council has failed to exercise appropriate oversight regarding our city’s administration. Effective oversight is achieved through hard work and follow-up. As a member of the Council, I look forward to inquiring about the priorities and lack of accountability in the respective city departments.
- Which programs of the District government will you want to cut back or eliminate so that higher-priority programs can be adequately funded rather than be victimized by indiscriminate across-the-board budget reductions?
This year the Council managed to adopt a balanced budget, meaning that for the time being further cuts may not be necessary. In any event, before I would propose making cuts to government programs, I would first like to make certain that our government is operating as efficiently as possible. By some estimates, the District could have access to an additional $300 million dollars a year if it would only: apply for and spend available federal block grants, renegotiate expired city leases, collect unpaid business and sales taxes, collect overdue water bills, sell surplus property, cut unnecessary overtime of city employees, require competitive bidding in city contracts, etc.
However, if it is determined that additional cuts would be needed, I would favor the cuts coming from further reductions in city employees. Notwithstanding the recent cutbacks in city employees, our city still has a disproportionate number of employees, especially in the middle management ranks.
- In 1995, the Council summarily abolished the Civilian Complaint Review Board, thereby allowing the Metropolitan Police Department to handle all public complaints about excessive use of force, harassment, or abusive language by the police without any kind of independent external review or supervision. Councilmember Evans and the MPD favor a plan suggested by Booz-Allen & Hamilton to establish a complaint procedure wherein senior or retired Superior Court judges would be in charge of handling such complaints. Others fear these judges are too familiar with our police force and may not usually be able to ensure objective and unbiased investigations of complaints against the police. Will you oppose putting the judges in charge of this process?
Let me first say that I strongly support the recreation of a Civilian Complaint Review Board. While I would favor putting ordinary citizens on such a Review Board, I am not troubled by having senior or retired Superior Court judges handle public complaints. By and large, I have a great deal of respect for these judges. During their careers on the bench, these individuals have sat impartially in judgment over a variety of important matters. I see no reason to believe that they are not up to this task as well. However, I am willing to reexamine this position if it is determined that the fears of familiarity are substantiated.
- The MPD, the ABC Board, and the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, and the Fire Department have been neglecting their proper duties and instead have been coordinating a relentless and deliberate campaign of harassment of singling out gay businesses. As a member of the Committee on Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, what will you do to help stop this systematic and discriminatory abuse of regulatory powers?
Harassment and discrimination by city employees against residents of our city must not be tolerated. The best way to address the issues of harassment and discrimination is through education. I propose meeting with the heads of these departments in an effort to determine the extent to which sensitivity training has been conducted. I would propose additional training where need. In the final analysis, there must be consequences for inappropriate actions, including dismissal. Once informed of such harassment and discrimination, I would demand that the appropriate punishment be levied.
- Do you favor Initiative 57, to legalize the use of medical marijuana when a patient’s doctor recommends it as a means to combat some of the effects of AIDS, cancer, and other diseases?
I support Initiative 57, though I am troubled by the fact that a doctor’s prescription is not required. However imperfect that Initiative 57 may be, I believe that those who are seriously ill should not be deprived of this medication. On a personal level, one of my closest friends credits marijuana with saving his life during a particularly critical time in his fight against AIDS. According to him, smoking marijuana stimulated his appetite when no other drugs worked. Fortunately for those of use who love him, he is now doing well.
- The District failed to spend $1 million of its own appropriated funds to combat AIDS in FY 1996 and had a similar problem in FY 1997. Such underspending, which jeopardizes the District’s ability to receive federal funding under the Ryan White Care Act, reflected the city’s long delay in awarding a contract for an effective needle exchange program and in implementing new programs targeted at underserved at-risk populations. As a member of the Committee on Human Services, what will you do to safeguard us against such fumbling by our health agencies?
The inability of our government to perform its various responsibilities is a function of inadequate training, a lack of technological resources, and an absence of accountability. Throughout our government, we need to focus on making sure that our employees have the skills and technological support to perform their jobs. From 1991-1996, poorly trained officials simply failed to monitor over $89 million dollars in federal grant money intended to provide housing to AIDS patients, screen for breast cancer, examine pregnant women and treat tuberculosis patients. As a government we must value our citizens above our bureaucrats. If individuals are unable to perform their jobs, they must be replaced.
- Do you support legal recognition of marriages between persons of the same sex?
Yes. On November 19, 1997, my partner, Ken Baker, and I will celebrate our 4th year anniversary. There can be no doubt that the love and affection that we share is equal in every respect to that between our heterosexual friends who are married. During our wonderful four year journey, we have supported each other emotionally, financially and spiritually. It saddens me that our government refuses to see the undeniable: our family is worthy of legal protection and recognition.
- Will you oppose efforts by Congress or other parties to stop the District of Columbia from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in Hawaii or other places?
Yes. I oppose efforts on the part of Congress to micro-manage the laws of this city. We need to reestablish a relationship with Congress that is build on clearly delineated lines of responsibility. As a Republican, I believe that I am in a good position to ask those in my party who control Congress to respect the decisions made by the City Council.
- Do you oppose efforts by Congress or other parties to outlaw or restrict adoptions by unmarried couples in the District of Columbia.
Yes. Ken and I have talked about our desire to adopt a child. As a result, this issue has particular significance in our lives. While we appreciate the difficulties associated with gay and lesbian couples raising children in an intolerant world, we are guided by the fact that every day countless children grown-up without a sense of love and security. As far as I am concerned, if our society really values two-parent families, the parents’ gender should not matter.
- If Congress ever repeals the D.C. Health Care Benefits Expansion Act of 1992 that established the registration of domestic partnership, will you vote to reenact the same law?
Yes. As I stated above, Congress should not be involved in such an intensely local matter. As an openly gay Republican with solid relationships with many influential Republicans, I have to believe that my advocacy on this issue would be useful.
- Do you agree the Boy Scouts of America is violating the D.C. Human Rights Law’s ban on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation by excluding gays from participating either as scouts or as leaders?
On its face, it does appear that the Boy Scouts of America are refusing to permit gays from participating in their organization in violation of the D.C. Human Right Law.
While at Georgetown University Law Center, I had the privilege of taking a course entitled "Sexual Orientation and the Law" taught by Chai Feldblum which focused on cases precisely like this one. It is my belief that every effort should be made to ensure that gays are able to participate in all aspect of public life, including the Boy Scouts.
- As a member of the Committee on Government Operations, will you support the reestablishment of the Office of Human Rights as an independent, adequately-staffed, Cabinet-level agency whose Director has direct access to the Mayor?
Yes. There can be no greater goal in our city than equality of opportunity. To this end, I strongly support the ability of the Office of Human Rights to protect our citizens against discriminatory treatment.
- Will you support legislation to authorize and regulate the issuance of liquor licenses to establishments (in designated nonresidential commercial districts) that want to offer nude dancing as entertainment?
Yes. Given the significance that bars and night clubs (including the type mentioned above) have played in the building of friendships and relationships within the gay and lesbian community, I strongly oppose efforts to be overly intrusive into such establishments. In the case of nude dancing, I certainly believe that the city has more pressing issues to combat than this one.
