The Sept. 25 editorial “Keeping the District open” rightly pointed out the absurdity of the District being “held hostage to the dysfunctional federal budget process.” The Post’s solution is to rely only on a narrow legal position to right a 222-year wrong for D.C. residents. History shows that legal approaches must be accompanied by civil disobedience to effect civil rights change. That is why I urged the mayor and council to defy federal law.
In a swipe at civil disobedience, The Post accused us of “nonchalance” in our deliberations. Far from nonchalant, the mayor and council carefully explored my proposal for civil disobedience, other legal and legislative approaches and the possible consequences of the refusal to adhere to an unjust federal law.
We have the opportunity to stand up for justice in a low-risk, high-reward situation. D.C. employees would get paid with no interruption in service to our residents, and through solidarity we would change the course of our struggle for autonomy. I have taken the moral high ground by proposing to break the law to correct a grave injustice, empowering our citizens and seizing a rare opportunity to highlight our plight in the District of Columbia.
David Grosso, Washington
The writer (I-At Large) is a member of the D.C. Council.