There's a right way and a wrong way to apologize
The recent DUI arrests of two politicians reminds us that sooner or later, you screw up and it's time to make amends. But be careful: A badly-handled mea culpa can make things worse.
Last Wednesday night, Oct. 17, when City Council candidate Venus Velázquez was pulled over by a Seattle police officer for alleged drunken driving, she had less than 24 hours to decide strategy for one of the trickiest decisions in politics: the public apology.
As a professional public affairs consultant, Velázquez knew the calculus: Going public just puts a bigger spotlight on the incident, but saying nothing sends a message that can be very damaging. For starters, silence in our culture is often taken as guilt, or at least lets others define how the incident is viewed. That's why it's baffling that Seattle City Council member Richard McIver has said almost nothing in public about his recent domestic-violence charge beyond this:
Domestic violence is a very serious issue. At this time I will not comment on the charges being brought against me except to say I will be pleading not guilty at my arraignment. I am cooperating fully with the investigation. I am asking the media to please respect my family's privacy.
In such situations, there is tremendous pressure from the media and supporters to say something. But what? If you do make a public statement, do you admit everything and throw yourself on the mercy of voters? Or do you pull a Bill Clinton: "I did not have driving relations with that automobile."
Having run for the Seattle City Council in 2005, I can imagine the anguish felt by Velázquez, completely apart from the issue of the DUI. She's spent a year calling people for money and criss-crossing the city asking for support. It's a huge exercise, and tough on friends and family. In her fiercely contested race with Bruce Harrell, for the seat Peter Steinbrueck is vacating, all that was at risk because – properly so – people no longer tolerate drunken driving.
Typically, rumors of such arrests race through the police precinct and whip through newsrooms and political offices. So Velázquez not only had legal and personal issues to work through, she also had to decide with her advisors on a public strategy.
Not surprisingly, the public statement at this point can get far more attention than anything said by the campaign. Few voters follow doorbelling and campaign appearances, but almost everybody suddenly learns your name and gets a sketchy sense of the incident. They know the script for cops when stopping a driver. They can imagine that moment, put themselves in that position, and assess your conduct.
No matter if it's a local case or a huge national controversy, the public apology can take one or more of several forms:
- Fight. Don't apologize. Attack whoever makes the allegation. Minimize their credibility. Make them suspect. Clinton used this repeatedly during the "Bimbo Eruptions." Long term for him, it worked. It helped that his GOP accusers went overboard, making him the victim.
- Apologize if anyone feels hurt, but not for any actual conduct. "I regret that you feel bad about the incident." Professional athletes often use that line.
- Say "mistakes were made" but don't say by whom. Ronald Reagan did this with Iran Contra.
- Take full responsibility and offer an unconditional apology. The model for this would be former Washington Supreme Court Justice Bobbe Bridge after a drunken driving arrest in 2003.
- Offer a measured apology for your conduct but stop short of specifically accepting guilt to the charge if it's in court. That's what Velázquez did with her posting on her Web site:
Dear Supporters,
Tuesday night, I was cited for driving under the influence. I take this charge very seriously and accept full responsibility for my actions.
Today, I want to apologize to all of you, who have supported me since I began this campaign, given me your trust and invested so much of yourselves in this journey.
I am more sorry about this incident than I can express in words. I am also sorry for the impact this will have on you, my supporters. I would never intentionally put others at risk or violate the great trust so many of you have given me.
And I respect the system that will ultimately judge my actions.
I am committed to serving you, the voters and the city of Seattle. I will continue to talk about the issues that matter and why I decided to seek a place on the city council–but not here. Here I accept responsibility and hope you will accept my apology. And I hope I will continue to have your support on November 6th.
–Venus
King County Council member Jane Hague faced a similar dilemma with her June 2 DUI arrest. Her problem may have been even worse since the arresting officer claimed that the Eastside Republican was belligerent. The politics are offset by the weak opposition she faces from Democrat-at-least-for-today Richard Pope.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!







Comments:
Posted Fri, Oct 19, 5:07 p.m. inappropriate
Time for Better Public Transportation: Let's get a citywide (or better yet countywide) means of quick, affordable, and reliable public transportation. With a citywide rail system our candidates and others who might have a few too many to drink could stay off the roads, reduce the risk of injuring themselves and others, and keep their good names intact.
Posted Sat, Oct 20, 8:15 a.m. inappropriate
How hard can it be?: Last night I went out to dinner with friends. I had two classes of wine because I was not driving home. The driver had lemonade. If I had been the driver, I would have had the lemonade. And I'm not even running for office! Is this so hard to do? Can you not give the booze a pass just this once? To me the point here is the fact that a person who knows they will be driving home has any drinks at all, not what they say after they are caught.
Posted Sat, Oct 20, 8:22 a.m. inappropriate
focus on the positive side: Apologies aside, the real truth is that Bruce Harrell is better person and a more qualified city council candidate than Venus.
Posted Sat, Oct 20, 9:57 a.m. inappropriate
Public Official DUI Apologism 101: In this enlightening course we'll develop theories of alcoholism denial, drunken driver behavioral dynamics, and alcohol-related homicidal socio-pathology. Among the skills developed will be enabling by friends and family, public apology, and disassociation of one's self from one's behavior and its consequences.
Prerequisites include election to (or striving for) a higher office, frequent attendance at alcohol-fueling events or establishments, functional alchoholism, a recent DUI (or domestic violence) arrest, and various excuses and rationales for one's drunken threatening behavior.
Note a more up-lifting course follows the 101 course typically taken by those in denial. This course, Public Official DUI Apologism 201, includes true rehab and a dedication by erring and errant public officials to work on improved and more draconian drunk driving laws with particularly harsh penalties for public officials because of their function as role models in our society. Among these penalties are immediate dismissal from office and and a five (5) year moratorium on future public service.
Posted Fri, Jan 25, 9:12 a.m. inappropriate
RE: Public Official DUI Apologism 101: No comment