Mayor Dave Cieslewicz's revised Halloween proposal was passed in the City Council Sept. 19, and tickets are now on sale. The proposal stipulates that any person wishing to enter State Street on Halloween night will pay $5 for one of 80,000 tickets. The proposal is the windfall of increasingly riotous and costly events over the past few years.
Well that's not quite right, let me rephrase: the proposal is the windfall of increasingly embarrassing news reports about the riotous and costly Halloween. In years past, when Madison appeared on the national morning news after Halloween, most people in Wisconsin and the U.S. shook their heads in dismay. Things had gotten out of hand. But, while most people were shaking their heads, some were marking their calendars. The word was out. Madison, come Halloween, threw one sweet party.
Naturally, the next year, more people came. So more policemen were stationed, State Street was made light as day at the flip of a switch, and horses patrolled. Yet, people still came. They swarmed the street, casting furtive glances at the imperious-looking policemen. The river of humanity they formed flowed down the street, little envelopes appearing and disappearing as merry-makers avoided the piles of fresh horseshit from the mounted officers' horses. And, when the dwindling crowd got drunk enough, they rioted in the magnificently lit street.
True, all that the mayor and council did decreased the embarrassment of the morning news reports, but it had come at a cost — a really big cost. The budget was ridiculous, unjustifiable, wretched excess. Something had to be done.
So Cieslewicz came up with the reasonable solution: the cover charge. And, after some debate, it was approved. Students here at the UW had different opinions on the matter, but one opinion, I'd hazard the most frequent, was that the mayor had officially robbed Halloween.
And what will a student actually be getting for his $5? To say that they're defraying the cost for the extra policemen is one answer, but really, that's what the city is using the money for. The student is paying for the right to be on State Street from 7:30 p.m. until 1:30 a.m. He is paying for the right to walk around on the street with others. He's paying for the right to enter private businesses on the street. On paper, it sounds rather silly. Walking down the street and entering businesses is something a person doesn't normally pay to do. In fact, there's good reason why the government doesn't require a person to pay for these things –it'd be breaking the law.
I've been reliably informed that a person has the right to assemble peacefully, and that under most circumstances, public streets shouldn't be denied to anyone. Halloween represents an extreme, but consider that Halloween has always been a spontaneous event, not sponsored or facilitated by any identifiable entity, but merely the voluntary assemblage of many citizens.
Consider one of the many protests that occur on State Street or the Capitol on any other day. Some of these protests are large enough to require the presence of police. The protesters aren't taxed by security, usually just obliged to stay on the sidewalk and out of traffic. Should the protesters become violent or riotous, the offending members are arrested, charged and fined. Though the reasons people go to State Street on Halloween are likely different from the reasons that people go to a protest, the effect is the same, and in the eyes of the law, it would be dangerous to make distinctions for the reasons that people assemble.
Granted, Halloween night ends in a drunken frenzy carried out by a few hundred, not a petition to the government, like a protest does. Perhaps it deserves to be subject to the attention of the police. However, not everyone riots, not everyone causes property damage and not everyone requires the extra police. Yet Cieslewicz's cover charge applies to everyone. It's unfair and infringing on the constitutional right to assemble. The fines should be reserved exclusively for lawbreakers, not people exercising their constitutional rights. The cost should be the burden of the people responsible for them. Should it be too troublesome to catch every offender, raise the cost of the fines for disorderly conduct, property damage and related laws. Should it be too costly to get caught, logically fewer people will run the risk.
The mayor's proposal, though well intended, is grievously flawed. Perhaps there isn't a perfect solution, and without some form of regulation, damages, riots and arrests will happen. However, shouldn't Madison prefer to endure some embarrassing news reports, while quietly vindicating the freedom of Wisconsin's citizens, rather than boasting its ability to uphold order while overlooking the dereliction of the rights of its people?
Cullen Haselby ([email protected]) is a freshman majoring in mathematics.