I like the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette’s Sylvia A. Smith a lot, not least of all when she’s holding my own party’s feet to the fire. Smith isn’t just a great political observer, but she represents one of the few remaining Washington-based reporters for an Indiana newspaper — in short, she offers what few others can.

This weekend was no exception, as Ms. Smith turned her gaze upon the current “debate” over the proposed use of reconciliation in the Senate to pass portions of the health care reform bill that has been bouncing from chamber-to-chamber over the last few months. For those needing a primer, Smith provides as much:

Under reconciliation, Senate filibusters are prohibited. That means a simple majority – 51 votes – is needed to pass something. When filibusters are permitted, it takes a supermajority of 60 votes to unblock a bill, meaning 41 senators can freeze Senate action.

To suggest that legislation passed by a majority vote is undemocratic and illegitimate is absurd.

Reconciliation is a tool the legislative body gave itself, so there is nothing unethical or underhanded about it.

More than anything, though, the column concerns itself with the blustery condemnation that has been shooting out of Republican press offices in Washington for weeks. Although there are more than a few swipes at the GOPers in question, the most scathing indictments are reserved for a political process that seems to have been brought to a stalemate not by procedural maneuvers, but rather by pure partisanship.

But if Republicans succeed in shifting the focus from content to process (that evil perversion of democracy, reconciliation), there is no need to seek common ground.

In the current climate, winning is all that seems to matter. Health insurance legislation is a zero-sum game. Any adjustments to the status quo (even wildly popular pre-existing condition change) would be a victory for Democrats.

My Democratic blogger are obviously and understandably quite ecstatic over the recent misfortunes surrounding City-County Councilor Lincoln Plowman and they cite the recent ethics complaint filed by Democratic Councilor Angela Mansfield as partial motivation for Plowman’s expected resignation today.

I read the complaint.  Mansfield is says that since Plowman won’t talk about the pending investigation he should disclose the nature of the investigation and if not, take a leave of absence until the investigation is over.   She also says if the citizens of District 25  have a problem, they should call the at-larges for help.

Where do I begin?

First of  Mansfield is an attorney and even a  first year law student knows that when there is an investigation you shut up.  But that really isn’t the issue.  What I find almost laughable is my Democratic friends have suddenly discovered ethics.

I don’t recall them saying much when former Councilor Ron Gibson and current Councilor Doris Minton McNeil had their “issues”.  In fact, I recall of number of them showing up for a news conference Gibson had expressing their support.   Both were criminally charged for their offenses.  Charges were dropped against Gibson and Minton-McNeil beat the wrap.   I don’t remember any of them leading the charge in 2007 to get a handle on former Council President Monroe Gray and they all sat silently when Paul Bateman had his problems.

Now in all due fairness to Mansfield, she did propose an ordinance that would have prohibited then Council Attorney Aaron Haith (who had his own ethics issues a while back) from representing both the Council and the members as individuals.  The measure was passed in 2008. 

I’m not saying Mansfield shouldn’t have filed her ethics complaint and asked Plowman to take a leave of absence, but she’s had several opportunities in the past to file  ethics complaints, but apparently going after the guy who fought her tooth and nail on the smoking ban just seemed the right way to go.

Correction:   I received an e-mail from Angela today telling me the ordinance that would prohibit Council attorneys from representing Councilors as individuals was passed in 2008.  The blog post has been changed to reflect that information.