by Sylvester Brown, Jr.
St. Louis County Prosecutor, Wesley Bell is an affable, articulate, good-looking, polished politician. I like him. But I can’t vote for him in Tuesday’s Primary election.
For me, it’s a matter of principle. I have
no choice but to support Bell’s opponent, 1st District Congresswomen
Cori Bush mostly because of her principled, courageous positions.
First, let’s do away with the hyperbole and
misinformation. The millions raised to defeat Bush has nothing to do with her record
of achievements in office; it’s because she had the temerity to call for a
ceasefire in Gaza right after Israel was attacked by Hamas last year. With
nearly 40,000 Palestinians-mostly civilian women and children-killed and
another 2.3 million driven from their homes and facing starvation, Bush’s
clarion call for a cessation of hostilities should have been heeded.
Pro-Israeli organizations like AIPAC vowed
to end the careers of any politician who dared to criticize the retaliatory
efforts in Gaza. After AIPAC spent
14 million to defeat Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York, it set its sights
on Bush.
I can’t in good conscious be a part of any
effort to muzzle a candidate who spoke truth to power. Apparently, Bell and I don’t
share that sentiment. Last year, Bell launched a campaign to take on GOP
Sen. Josh Hawley for the Democratic nomination in the primary. Then
immediately after the terrorist attack on Israel and after pro-Israeli groups
vowed to eliminate Bush, he dropped his U.S. senatorial aspirations and inserted
himself in the congressional race.
I can’t in good conscious be a part of any effort to muzzle a candidate who spoke truth to power.
For me, that was an unprincipled, opportunistic
stance. Especially in light of a story
released last week by Drop Site News that included an audio recording of Bell-just
a few before months launching his primary challenge-assuring Bush that he-“under no
circumstances”- planned to run against her.
I not only have a problem with why he’s challenging Bush, but I also take issue with the way he’s doing it. Bell and his multi-millionaire benefactors have adopted an advertising campaign buoyed by the “angry, crazy, irrational black woman” trope. His ads claim that Bush was so irresponsible that her opposition to President Biden’s infrastructure bill-motivated by her petty politics-cost the city and state millions in federal aid.
Bell and his multi-millionaire benefactors have adopted an advertising campaign buoyed by the “angry, crazy, irrational black woman” trope.
Not true. All states including those represented by Republicans
who voted against Biden’s mandate benefit from the infrastructure bill. When I asked Mayor Tishaura Jones if St. Louis
was harmed by Bush’s no-vote on the bill, she emphatically answered
“no,” adding:
“We are still
getting infrastructure money, mostly in the form of transportation
dollars...so, no, we have not been negatively impacted by her vote.”
Jones not
only pointed to the “tens of millions” Bush secured for St. Louis after the
flood of ‘22, she said she also secured “almost $90 million in infrastructure
funding” for the city’s water department. Jones. who endorsed Bush in July, said Bush
delivered “over $41 million in community project funding" to the district, with $22.3 million directly aiding the city of St. Louis and its public
school system.
Despite
Bell’s dubious claim that Bush has cost the region valuable resources,
she has, in fact, delivered more than $2 billion throughout her time in
congress. Mayor Jones credits Bush for helping the region secure nearly $300
million in American Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds. Jones is using part of that
windfall to specifically revitalize North St. Louis.
Which brings
me to another valid (and selfish) reason for supporting Bush. She and Mayor Jones
have combined their “sister girl magic” through their
partnership in Washington D.C. and St. Louis to bring resources to a segment
of the city that hasn’t received any economic attention in 70 years.
Why mess
with a good thing?
It’s no
secret that Bell is receiving vigorous support from conservatives. In 2006, he managed the campaign of Mark J.
Byrne, a conservative Republican running against former 1st District
Congressman, Lacy Clay. According to the Huffington Post, as of May, Bell had raised
more than $65,000 in contributions from donors who normally give to
Republicans. “They include a former GOP speaker of the Missouri House, the
billionaire hedge fund founder Daniel Loeb, and the former finance chair for
Sen. Tim Scott’s presidential super PAC.
Again, Bell
is a likable guy but if powerful money motivated him to switch races to
challenge Bush, what part will power, and conservative collaborations play in efforts
to revitalize parts of St. Louis that these parties have historically
undervalued?
I don’t like
that I must take a side in the congressional race. I wish Bell had stood by his
bold decision to challenge Josh Hawley who, let’s face it, needs to be run out
of office by voters as fast as he was run out of the capitol by Jan 6 insurrectionists.
Instead, I’m depending on Marine veteran and democrat Lucas Kunce to win the senate seat.
If powerful money motivated him to switch races, what part will conservative collaborations play in efforts to revitalize parts of St. Louis that these parties have historically undervalued?
I wish I
didn’t have to point out how Bell seized an opportunity to destroy the career of
a black congresswoman who courageously said the right thing at a time the
powers-at-be deemed inappropriate. I can’t ignore his alliances with big moneyed
conservatives with agendas opposite those I value. I can’t help that I’m not confident Bell is
the right guy to stand by Mayor Jones and her efforts to revitalize North St.
Louis if his powerful conservative backers don’t see the value of such efforts.
Bush or Bell? As a matter of principle, the choice is easy:
Comments