The big story in the news this morning was that the D.C. Council had quickly approved a bill granting D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams a set of new and controversial tools to crack down on violent crime. But a secondary story has appeared that may actually have more of a life than the details of the legislation — the lone dissenting vote cast by council-member and mayoral contender Adrian Fenty (D-Ward 4).

What makes Fenty’s vote newsworthy is that as the rest of the council played easy politics and voted for the measures (thus assuring that they can break out the law and order card come election time), he stood his ground and expressed his principled opposition to a solution he saw more as cosmetic than comprehensive. And in refusing to bow down to the knee-jerk legislation proposed by Williams and pushed by fellow mayoral hopeful Linda Cropp, Fenty presented himself as a thinker, a politician more interested in solutions than the appearance of solutions. As quoted by the Post:

I think people know that these are not ways to solve crime. At best, we’re tinkering around the edges. At worst, we are putting forth that we are doing something about a crime emergency when everyone in this room knows that we are not.

And, similarly, in the Washington Times:

There is great pressure on this government to do something about crime right now. The opportunity cost of voting for this measure without any serious proposal to address crime in the community is giving away our leverage. At the end of the day we will have voted on … no more officers on the street, no more innovative ways of dealing with crime, no more aggressive prosecution, just a few feel-good measures.