More democracy as a solution for the need for an independent Attorney General

While I was away, the city's Attorney General resigned, indicating that the Mayor's General Counsel was meddling and second guessing. See "Singer Quits Post; Aides Cite Clashes With Fenty Counsel: Top Lawyer Felt Sidelined, Some Say," from the Washington Post.

Most if not all states have an elected attorney general. DC has pretensions of being a state, yet too often the executive and legislative branches of government do not function at an equivalent level. cf "Residents Keep D.C. Vote Fight Brewing: Tea Party Protest Evokes Famed Boston Revolt," from the Post.

In response to the resignation, Councilmember Mendelson has offered legislation putting more strictures on how the Executive (the Mayor) can deal with the Attorney General, see "Mendelson Moves to Redefine Attorney General's Role." From the article:

Under the bill, applicants would need at least seven years' experience in the District; a vetting process for the position would be required; the term would be six years; and there would be protections against removal. These qualifications are similar to the ones the council approved for the inspector general's job in 2003.

And the Washington Post editorialized some mumbo-jumbo on the same topic, in "D.C.'s Attorney General: As Linda Singer departs, the position's independence must be preserved."

In the U.S. form of government, the people are sovereign. The law belongs to the people. Therefore, make the Attorney General an elected position, and the Attorney General would ultimately be responsible to the Citizens of the District of Columbia. (Elsewhere I have suggested that this be done at the Federal level as well, that the Department of Justice and the law belongs to the people, not the President.)

Such a proposal could go on the ballot in the 2008 General Election, and if passed, could become operative with the 2010 Primary and General Elections.

Also see National Association of Attorneys General