THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, April 14, 1995 TAG: 9504130170
SECTION: CHESAPEAKE CLIPPER PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 63 lines
The tape-recorded telephone conversations between Vice Mayor Arthur L. Dwyer and his constituent, Sandra Lewis, have inspired shock, embarrassment, disappointment, betrayal, anger and disgust. But the emotion that prevails is sadness.
Sadness first for the city of Chesapeake, which has suffered so often in its recent past from the flawed judgment of its leaders.
Sadness for those who elected Mr. Dwyer to office in the expectation that he was a man who understood and accepted the obligations of public service.
Sadness for Mr. Dwyer's colleagues on City Council, whose confidence he so cynically betrayed.
Finally, there is sadness that a man of Mr. Dwyer's maturity and station in life could be so pitifully compromised.
Mr. Dwyer and the diminishing number of his defenders on the council have suggested that the foremost consideration in this matter is whether he broke the law. It is not.
Certainly it is essential that Mr. Dwyer's conduct be fully investigated by legal authorities. People have to know that the power they entrust to their elected leaders is used responsibly.
But there is more at stake than simple compliance with the law. Mr. Dwyer's behavior is not excusable just because it might have been legal.
Citizens have a right to demand more of public officials than that they avoid indictment. They can insist that their leaders represent them in a way that is consistent with their own values and standards of conduct.
Mr. Dwyer has attacked the credibility of the evidence against him. He has disparaged Mrs. Lewis' integrity and motives. He has bashed the press for reporting the story. He has even implied that it is the integrity of the city that has been called into question rather than his own.
What he has not done is face up to what he has done and atone for it.
It may be true, as Mr. Dwyer has said, that Mrs. Lewis' behavior in this matter is not above reproach. There is nothing on the tapes to suggest that she would make a good City Council member.
But there are two voices on the tapes. And Mrs. Lewis does not have a seat on the council. Mr. Dwyer does.
The more Mr. Dwyer attempts to undermine the character and credibility of Mrs. Lewis, the more he places his own judgment into doubt. If she is who he says she is, how does he explain the intimacy he shared with her?
Councilman Peter P. Duda, a God-fearing man, has suggested that because we are all imperfect beings that we are obliged to overlook Mr. Dwyer's failings. The Christian thing to do, he said, is to forgive and forget.
Forgiveness is a fine thing. But Christian charity in no way requires us to continue to follow a leader who has shown himself to be unworthy to lead us. God does not ask us to be dupes.
The voice on the tapes is Mr. Dwyer's. The responsibility for what he said and did belongs to him.
If he can find the character to accept that responsibility, he will admit that his poor judgment has made it impossible for him to continue to function in a position of public trust.
KEYWORDS: CHESAPEAKE CITY COUNCIL by CNB