| First, let me just say that I agree with those who may accuse me of putting the cart before the horse here. This entire scenario is largely predicated on Craig Johnson winning the special election tomorrow and many of us have been working hard to make that happen. Some may feel that this is a distraction from those efforts and they are probably right. But, I think this needs to be discussed sooner rather than later. Plus, it's yet another excuse to quote my dear friend John McArdle.
As for the first question, "who exactly are these two Senators?" I have some guesses, but they're probably wrong. I have heard Bonacic's name floated a few times. He has certainly not made any friends in his own caucus this term and lord knows Susan Zimet gave him one hell of a scare last cycle. That said, I have my doubts that he is one of the two floating in the "ZOPA". Any further speculation by me would be pure guesswork. Maybe you have some ideas?
As for the second question, I think that's pretty obvious. I think that if there are indeed to Senators willing to flip, they would be doing so as a measure of pure self preservation. The days of GOP control of the state Senate are numbered and everybody knows it. Being in the minority sucks and those that have spent their entire careers in the majority know that better than anyone. A win tomorrow most likely will spur some retirements later this year. There are plenty of Senators who have been there for decades and have never experienced not controlling the Senate. They probably don't want to experience that either. And then there are those who want to continue in the Senate, but are perfectly willing to switch sides to keep the perks of the majority.
Should reformers welcome them? I don't want to speak for all, but this reformer most likely wouldn't. At least I wouldn't support them next cycle. Sure, let them switch and vote for new leadership and new rules. Let them send Joe Bruno to the minority while he waits to get his ticket punched to prison.
Then it's put up or shut up time for lots of folks, including the switchers and, honestly, I'm not all that optimistic about even many Democrats once the barrier to reform that is the GOP controlled Senate is removed. I just don't trust those that built this system, those that created this mess, to clean it up. That goes for the folks with a new letter behind their name and for those who have been talking tough about reform for years without doing all that much to get it done no matter what party they are/were a member of.
In the end, I also don't trust those whose greatest talent is self preservation. Once you've switched parties to keep the perks, (What are those perks? Well, mostly we're talking member item dollars here) what does that say about your commitment to reforming the system you helped create? Where were you on these issues for the last few decades? What the hell took you so long?
Personally, I would support the switchers for this term and welcome them warmly. Then I would support actual reform candidates in a primary against each and every one of them. Why not get the real thing, I say.
What say you?
As for the final question...
John McArdle, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R-Brunswick), called Smith's claim "flat-out not true."
"It's ridiculous," he said. "It's almost laughable. It's wishful thinking on his part."
I think the answer is obvious. Johnny boy was indeed just born that way. He can't help it. |
