HARVEY THE DISTORTER

A letter recently mailed by Sunny Isles Beach candidate Harvey Busch had some curious statements that should be questioned and/or clarified given that they are confusing or
outright misleading. The statements taken directly from his letter are the following (in bold):

I live in Sunny Isles Full time and understanding surfacing problems.

First, we would like to offer Mr. Harvey Busch some free advice. If he cannot construct a proper
sentence, we recommend that he consult an editor. We imagine that he meant to say “and I understand surfacing problems,” though, even with the grammatical correction, the statement, like the rest of his letter, is vague and extraordinarily uninformative.

Secondly, I am retired and unlike my opponent, I will devote full time to your needs.

Again, the sentence is grammatically daring, but that is not what is most alarming. Inherent in this statement is the assumption that being a commissioner is a full time job. It isn’t. Commissioners don’t run the City. Their job is to set policies. Mr. Harvey Busch seems to think that, as an 82-year-old retiree, he is better qualified to do the job based solely on the fact that he’ll show up every day. Right now there are three sitting Commissioners who are non-retirees, and there’s about to be a fourth sworn in (Commissioner-Elect Jennifer Levin). These four Commissioners have, collectively, decades of business experience and are currently applying their knowledge and experience to the job in order to make intelligent, informed decisions that affect the future of our City. This includes decisions ranging from engineering and building, legal decisions, quality of life decisions and, most importantly, financial decisions. At the end of the day, if you were undergoing surgery, would you want the experienced surgeon who could do it in four hours or the one who has lived a long time, has rarely performed a surgery, and thinks it should take all day?

His [Bud Scholl’s] frequent out of City and State excursions are indicative of his commitment.

Imbedded in this sentence are even more assumptions that Harvey Busch hopes the readers will accept as some kind of fact. First, let’s look at the use of the word “excursion” –which is intended to convey the idea that Commissioner Scholl is going on frequent trips for pleasure. Harvey Busch, however, offers ZERO FACTS OR DETAILS. As such, his misguided allegation is a glaring example of his effort to mislead voters as well as of his lack of understanding  of a typical business executive’s day-to-day activities.  Apparently,  Mr. Busch does not grasp that part of a businessperson’s responsibility may include conducting business beyond the City’s boundaries. Furthermore, he goes on to state that these “excursions” are frequent, but does not say how he personally knows when his opponent is or isn’t in the area.  Chances are he does not really know.  And if he does, then that’s outright disturbing.

Despite Mr. Busch’s effort to distract voters from the facts, the bottom line is that  being active in the community one serves as well as in the current business environment provides valuable perspective when making policy decisions that will affect the rest of us for years to come.

I signed an ethics oath voluntarily, which my opponent refused to sign.

There are two noteworthy points on this tricky sentence (free of grammatical errors, by the
way – well done Mr. Busch!). First of all, by sending out this letter, Harvey Busch may be in violation of this ethics oath to which he refers. Paragraph seven (7) of the voluntary statement of Fair Campaign Practices of the Miami-Dade Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust, found at this link: http://www.miamidade.gov/ethics/pdf/DECLARATION.pdf, clearly states that the candidate shall “run a positive campaign emphasizing [his/her] qualifications for office
and positions on issues of public concern.” Paragraph eight (8) states that the
candidate“will limit [his/her] attacks on an opponent to legitimate challenges
to that person’s record, qualifications, and positions.” If this is indeed
the voluntary ethics oath that candidate Busch is so proud to have signed, then
his letter is evidence of his colossal failure to uphold it. He clearly is not
running a positive campaign and has not ONCE mentioned his opponent’s record,
qualifications, or positions.

Second, Mr. Harvey Busch fails to mention that there is a non-voluntary / mandatory fair campaign practices ordinance to which all candidates are bound. Therefore, signing the
voluntary oath does not make a candidate more ethical or more likely to run an
ethical campaign than his or her opponents. Case in point: Two years ago,
there were three candidates who ran for commission seat #4. Two signed the voluntary
oath and one did not. Of the two who signed, one was later convicted for an
elections-related crime and the other is awaiting trial for alleged illegal activities that he conducted in the middle of his campaigning (refer to Miami Heral article from 10/09/2012 posted on this site). In short, the voluntary oath is rendered meaningless if those who take it aim to violate it as Harvey Busch seems to already have done.

He has resorted to personal attacks and attempted to bully me to withdraw.

Has anyone received any letters or seen any advertisements personally attacking Mr. Busch? How exactly was Harvey Busch bullied? Again, he offers ZERO FACTS. Please, Mr. Busch, if there is something the community should know, you should tell us. But do not
insult our intelligence by making bald allegations hoping that voters will blindly follow.

I am proud to be endorsed by the Miami-Dade PBA

Let’s clarify a few things. The Miami-Dade PBA is the Police Benevolent Association. Upon reading Mr. Busch’s letter, this is what we found most surprising of all. A phone call to the PBA revealed the FACT, (again, Mr. Busch does not seem too concerned with presenting whole facts,) that the PBA endorsed BOTH CANDIDATES. The reasons for this will be explored further, and we will be sure to let our readers know as soon as we get more details.

OUR CLOSING THOUGHTS
The mailings of the two candidates give voters a very clear picture of what each has to offer.  Eighty-two (82) year old Harvey Busch’s mailing offers very little in substance to his Valued Voters. His ideas are vague and lackluster and quite possibly in violation of the Miami-Dade Ethical Campaign Practices Ordinance. Mr. Busch goes out of his way
to smear his opponent with distortions and unfounded arguments.  Mr. Busch’s mailing gives voters no idea of who he really is or what he has accomplished in his life. Instead, he offers extraordinarily flawed arguments that cannot stand up to the slightest scrutiny.

In contrast, Fifty-three (53) year old Commissioner Bud Scholl’s mailing [available by clicking  on the link at:   http://sibreporter.net/?attachment_id=770 ] tells much about a man who is ready and capable to handle a wide variety of projects and responsibilities. As an accomplished individual in both the private and public sector, Commissioner Scholl is the only choice in this race as he has proved to be a great friend to the community and worthy of four more years.

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to HARVEY THE DISTORTER

  1. Greg says:

    All I see in this race is Harvey 82 going on 83….if elected he will be nearly 87 by the end of his term…if you think he is stumbling around grammatically now, imagine how his words will come out then!…Please, Harvey, go find a golf course and “suffer”….. spare yourself the embarrassment….

  2. sandy says:

    He’s already embarrassed himself by entering the race. He is an octogenarian!! Reminds me of that old movie Sunset Boulevard…maybe he looks in the mirror & sees a young guy staring back ;)))))))))))))

  3. Roger says:

    Regardless of age. When you compare the two candidates poor Harvey looks way out of his league.

  4. B0b says:

    In my opinion it is not a choice about age but rather does Mr. Busch personally have the proven background to help oversee the City’s budget and expenses. It doesn’t appear so.

  5. Bob Welsh says:

    Harvey is a long time personal friend and someone who has served on many City committees over the past ten years. He has freely given of his time and his business experience has been invaluable in investigating citizen complaints. His recommendations to the Commission and the City Staff have been on target and a welcome addition to the inclusive atmosphere that exists in the City. I am sorry this campaign has sunk to the depths of name calling. Both candidates should concentrate on their own qualifications and accomplishments thereby giving the voter reasons to make an intelligent choice. Harvey is vigorous and energetic rendering his chronological age inconsequential.

  6. Tony LoCastro says:

    The comment you made about the commissioner’s job not being full time is valid. However, given the choice, I would rather have a commissioner who spends a great deal of time as a public servant meeting with constituents, than an “idea man” who puts his business interests ahead of mine and pops in once in awhile for required meetings. One of the reasons our city has prospered has been the diversity of its commission and its hands on approach to day to day tasks.

    Secondly, if elected, Mr. Busch will be the only commissioner (the Mayor excluded) who is retired and who is a senior. Considering the fact that this community has a large percentage of seniors, one representative of that constituency seems proper.

    I know both gentlemen very well and respect them both, but for what he stands for and for who he is, I think Harvey Busch is the better of the two candidates.

  7. serge says:

    it looks to me li ke bud scholl is a better choice but in the end is up to voters

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *