"The cocoon of the Albany status quo"

I've thought about this all night (4.00 / 2)

and all morning. I really think it's the right thing to do. So I am.

TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 14:07:46 PM UTC

This too shall pass (0.00 / 0)

Silver has solid support in his caucus, and even more solid support in his district.

He is no LIEberman, and working to primary him would be a complete waste of your limited political resources.

There are Republican-held Senate districts in Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island that would be a much better place for you to spend those limited resources.

Spitzer's conceit that no legislator is qualified to be comptroller is belied by the record of the last two comptrollers.

And the vote this week came down to a Bloomberg appointee and a Democratic assemblyman.

For most Democrats, that's an easy choice.

---

by: devtob @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:24:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Amen, Lipris! (4.00 / 1)

Shelly pisses me off so much because he's a goddamn "Democrat."  I expect stuff like this from the GOP, but when dems do it, it irks me to my last nerve.  We can't have people like Shelly in our state government tarnishing our party name. 

He absolutely has to go.

---

by: Roatti @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 14:29:59 PM UTC

Shelly is going nowhere (0.00 / 0)

because he represented his members in this matter, and stood up to Spitzer who was implicitly dissing them.

Spitzer has plenty of appointments to make; the Legislature had this rare one.

Shelly and the Assembly Democrats exercised their prerogative to choose a replacement comptroller. They chose a Democrat over an appointee of Bush-funding Bloomberg.

Done, over.

Please don't help the Republicans by making a big deal out of this molehill.

---

by: devtob @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:32:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lets Face it (4.00 / 1)

Silver is entrenched.  Any attempt at unseating him is going to end in failure and anyone serious about a future in politics is not going to step up and take him on.  I think a better strategy would be to get members of the assembly to break ranks with Silver and undermine his power base.  This can be achieved by either Primarying other assemblymen, getting reformers in via special elections (there are three coming up right?) or simple advocacy.  Once we undermine Silver's power base he'll be an easier target.

---

by: sabachi @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 14:32:54 PM UTC

you're probably right. (4.00 / 2)

but no one ever accused me of being particularly bright. one reason i'm pledging this support for such a candidate, should they emerge, is that it's easy for me. i'm one subway stop away from shelly's district.

i'm all about undermining shelly's support, but i'm also crazy and naive enough to go right after the guy, too.

TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 14:36:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree with the primary challenge (0.00 / 0)

Even if he wins, he will be humiliated and publicly weakened, as Lieberman was

---

by: Roatti @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:20:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Or (0.00 / 0)

he will demolish his primary opponent and go on doing what he wants like Hillary did.

---

by: sabachi @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:37:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's possible (4.00 / 1)

But Shelly's negatives are so high, any challenge would give him a good fight.  It's at least worth a try. 

---

by: Roatti @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:41:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

for the publicity value alone (4.00 / 1)

it's worth doing. for the opportunity to educate the public about reform issues it's worth doing. for the chance to show the citizens of new york who is on their side and who exists to perpetuate the status quo it's worth doing.


TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:44:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If the Primary Opponent Gets publicity (0.00 / 0)

It will be worth it without question.  I just don't think a primary opponent to Silver will get any attention from the traditional media.

---

by: sabachi @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 16:03:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And that might lead to other Assembly Democrats (0.00 / 0)

jumping ship on his leadership. 

---

by: Roatti @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:25:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Those who broke from their leadership (4.00 / 2)

Repub Senators who voted for Stark along with the Democratic Senators (Per Cap. Connections):
Senators John Bonacic, George Maziarz and Joe Robach

Democratic Assembly members who voted for Stark against the Assembly Majority:
Millman and Tonko

---

by: am @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 14:55:04 PM UTC

way to go, Joan! (4.00 / 1)

(Millman is my Assemblywoman... I think she'll get a donation from me!)

---

by: Silverleaf @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:35:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's the SYSTEM, not persons... (4.00 / 5)

Am not sure at all that much of the problem would be solved by simply knocking down Shelly-- which would, as pointed out, be a difficult task.  Forgive my continual wonkishness, but I really think that the work needs to be focused on changing rules and procedures, not persons.  Now, of course, you can point out that as long as 3 guys call the shots, the rules won't change.... but, then, that is where the "feet to the fire" aspect of our grassroots/netroots organizing comes in.

I'm a big fan of Spitzer, and I think that his fairly confrontational style is appropriate to the mega-difficulties that we face.  But, over-reaching power in the Governor's office is an aspect of that problem, as was quite evident under our last gov.  We will not fix this sorry mess with a steamroller (OK-- after all that "we can call it 'passion'" work during the campaign, how dumb was it for Eliot to give himself a scary nickname before the first month was out?  Gov, you are listening to too many AG office lawyer-types, and not enough diplomats!  Ask Silda to come up with a friendlier nickname, PLEEZE).

Back to the Brennan Ctr. recommendations, I think... although it brings us into uncharted territory, as we know how to elect new persons, but do not have a map for the institution of less dysfunctional governance systems.  But, there are any number of camera-ready schmoozing smooth-talkers in the Assembly ready to take right over where Shelly left off as power broker if he were suddenly out of the picture.  We need a genuine policy-development infrastructure-- to start replacing a system based on power and patronage.  I think that starts by opening up Shelly's staff-- Program Development-- to input from the rank-and-file (incl. minority) members, and the public.  Perhaps some restructuring that brings more of that work into Legislative Commissions and the light of day.  Dare ya, Shelly-- you've got my resume and you know where I live-- happy to help if you really want to make it happen (or think, correctly, that 'we, the people' will make it happen with or without you).

---

by: robinia @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:08:00 PM UTC

It is the system, but... (4.00 / 1)

we have to hold the individuals who created this system responsible if there is to be any sens eof justice in our state poltiics.

---

by: Roatti @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:22:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

agreed (4.00 / 2)

wholeheartedly so. but, to be honest, i've had enough of shelly's crap. same for the the assembly person from harlem that yelled out "resign then!" as another was pointing out the "most dysfunctional in the nation" label attached to our state government. in fact, i've had enough from a whole mess of assembly critters.

everything flows from rules reform. everything. we need to bring folks to albany who are willing to change those rules.

TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:22:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Grandstanding, blowhard (4.00 / 1)

wingnuts don't necessary deserve any respect just because they declare themselves "reformers." Republican minority assemblymen lining themselves up along with Spitzer can seem to make themselves look good -- and they have nothing to lose. I doubt based on this vote (or actually probably any of their votes) is any reason to give them too much credit on the "reforming" Albany mission.

---

by: am @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 16:10:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

well... (4.00 / 1)

Our state government also had a de facto triumvirate running it in the mid-Nineties.  It took three or four elections to break it up, one member/leg of it each time.  Once the breakdown began, rules were less important than PR that created a concrete sense of corruption/abuse and there being viable, competent, alternatives to vote for at election time.  Open seats were key gains for reformers, primaries set the tone.  Rules changes did little, getting rid of bad politicians did a lot.

Spitzer is (of course) the right start in NY.  Bruno looks due for crumbling and fall in '08.  My impression is that as a practical matter, Silver can't be dealt with before or at the same time as Bruno.  But that doesn't mean the groundwork shouldn't be laid for a real push in '10.

NY Democrats would greatly help themselves by running some primaries in '08 to demonstrate that they and the Party apparatus (how ever unwillingly) admit and will deal with the Silver problem.  I'd go at Silver with a reformist sacrificial lamb who is excellent at PR- winning isn't important, probably even undesirable, but making Silver seem obsolete and past his prime is.  It would do good to also primary his key cronies- knocking off even one or two in '08 would set things in motion, put the chamber on notice that it's serious and Change is near.

---

by: baystater @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 23:48:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Excellent! (0.00 / 0)

Rules changes did little, getting rid of bad politicians did a lot.

There are some good people in Albany, trying to live in an awful environment. If we can identify those people, get them some help and support them in their efforts, we have a shot.

Might take four years, but, hey, it's worth the invested time.

We've got some work ahead of us.

---

by: NYBri @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 23:55:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Assembly is (4.00 / 3)

more than 2 to 1 democratic. Silver is probably safe as can be in his own seat. With a 2 to 1 majority he is probbly safe from leadership challenge also.

But...

It would be very helpful to know where the Assembly Democrats stand on reform issues. How much of a reform caucus is there is in the Assembly? I don't know.

I do know that it is much tougher for a majority member to see the need for reforming a system that works to their own benefit.

It is much easier for a minority legislator to see how badly broken oour governmental process is.

This was made clear to me a couple years ago when we interviewed 2 quality democrats, one in the Senate minority and one in the Assembly majority, on the subject of the Brennan Center reforms.

The minority member thought the Brennan report was right on target and told stories to support the report. The majority member thought is was much ado about nothing, that the system worked well and enabled them to "get things done."

Reform has to start in the Senate. But it would be a good idea to canvass assembly members to see how large a reform caucus there is in the assembly.

It is time to start holding these folks feet to the fire. We can't let up the pressure for even an instant. They need to be made to understand that the old ways will not be tolerated any longer.

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:09:15 PM UTC

Absolutely, we need the Senate (0.00 / 0)

Getting a Democratic reform Senate forces everyone to show their hand, no more hiding behind single house or minority votes. With Dems in all three branches, all running as reformers, they have no choice, no excuse but to put their OUR money where their mouth is.

We really don't want to cripple the Dem Assembly, enable the Repubs in the name of reform, and have give more power to those for whom reform and progressive causes are the least of their interests.

---

by: am @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 16:15:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Assembly under Silver (0.00 / 0)

has supported reform bills, which have died in the Senate.

This Silver-bashing is disquieting; he held the line for 12 years on a wide range of issues against Pataki/Boss Bruno, and now he's no good because he exercised his prerogative to choose a replacement comptroller.

I don't get it.

Silver is not perfect, like every politician, including Spitzer.

But he does not deserve the kind of vicious ingratitude DEMOCRATS are voicing here.

---

by: devtob @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:15:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

We don't know (0.00 / 0)

how much of a reformer Shelly Silver really is. It has always been safe for the Assembly to pass reform resolutions that they knew would never become law.

For me the jury is still out on Silver. The whole comptroller thing was pure power politics between Silver and Spitzer with Joe Bruno mostly sidelined but siding with Silver as it serves his interests to weaken Spitzer and continue to the status quo.

For me, the rubber hits the road on reform. The assembly instituted a few of the Brennan Center reforms a couple years ago but not enough. They were very resistant. Let's see them pass full public financing of campaigns. Let's see them pass non-partisan redistricting. Let's see them pass lobbying reform and authorities reform. Let's see them pressure Bruno into passing some of this as well.

I'm from Missouri as far as Silver and the Assembly majority is concerned... they've gotta show me.

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 16:32:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Reform Caucus? (4.00 / 1)

"It would be very helpful to know where the Assembly Democrats stand on reform issues. How much of a reform caucus is there is in the Assembly? I don't know."

My brand new Assemblyman, who ran on "reforming Albany," just voted with the Dem majority for Dinapoli, so I'd imagine finding a Reform Caucus in the Assembly is akin to finding the proverbial needle in a haystack...

The only genuine legislative reformer that I'm aware of sits in the Senate --- that's Liz Kreuger. I was even actually able to vote for her once, before the Repubs redistricted her.

---

by: JohnS @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:50:48 PM UTC

We need a constitutional convention (0.00 / 0)

I'm going to blog about this at some point, because I really don't see any other way out. You can primary Silver, sure, but he's got his district so tightly sewn up that I really doubt that's going to work.

So take it directly to the people. Have a constitutional convention and write it in law that the rules of the legislature change. They're never going to reform on their own, obviously.

---

by: Michael Bouldin @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 15:55:50 PM UTC

A Constitutional Convention (0.00 / 0)

sounds good and there have been some calls for one but...

... the devil is in the details of who gets picked as representatives to the convention. As things stand right now it would likely be packed full of special interest representatives that would spend all their effort writing new rules to protect their own interests rather than promote the best possible democratic constitution for everyone in the state.

Assemblyman Brodsky had a plan out there calling for a convention. He had a web page up for this but I can't seem to find it now. Here is a link to an html conversion of a pdf file regarding Brodsky's old proposal.

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 16:46:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Would have to be a full-court press (0.00 / 0)

Take out Shelly, and the next Shelly will likely come along soon.  Maybe things would be better for a while, but I don't see the culture changing quickly.

Primarying every majority incumbent with a reform candidate might have more effect, though it would be hard to do and cost a lot.  Spitzer sounds vaguely interested, but it'd be an uphill battle.

(I'd love to see reform-minded Republicans do the same for the Senate.)

Alternatively, I generally think term limits are an awful idea, but every now and then there's a case where they might be necessary.  The New York State Legislature seems to me to be just that situation, though the odds of term limits happening are, er, zero.

And yes, a constitutional convention would be great, but the next time that's required to be on the ballot is 2017, I think.

---

by: simonstl @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 16:26:30 PM UTC

How about a half-court press? (0.00 / 0)

Reforming Albany could take a lifetime, but ya gotta start somewhere.  Targeting one vulnerable majority incumbent for primarying rather than every  majority incumbent might be a reasonable start.

---

by: JohnS @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 17:16:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That'd be easier, but... (0.00 / 0)

targeting one vulnerable incumbent isn't going to make the rest of them think they have cause to worry.

Not only that, but the rest of the unchallenged folks can pour their campaign funds into the 'vulnerable' district and make it seem a lot less vulnerable.

---

by: simonstl @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 18:23:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't have said easier... (0.00 / 0)

...I would have said more feasible. And you bring up a good point. Having to divert chunks of cash away from other incumbents then threatens their invincibility.

Right now the herd is largely unchallenged. I absolutely believe we should be thinking like a wolf pack here. That is, we should be targeting the weakest for dinner. The rest of the herd WILL notice.

---

by: JohnS @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 21:33:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

metaphor problem (0.00 / 0)

The 'herd' you're talking about is not a herd.  It's a pack - well-organized, with a clearly defined leadership and roles for all players.

There's certainly friction within that pack, as many want to be the top dog, but they'll come together to help out anyone we target as their 'weakest.'

Whether that weakens them depends on whether it matters how much aid they can pour in.  My guess is that it won't weaken them - they'll just hold another fundraiser.

Putting a challenger everywhere forces everyone in the pack to think for themselves, and limits their opportunities to help each other and heal easily. 

Is it doable?  I don't know.

---

by: simonstl @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 22:30:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How about disbanding (0.00 / 0)

this circular firing squad?

---

by: devtob @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 02:03:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

How about thinking about (0.00 / 0)

what 'democratic' actually means?

Sheldon Silver may be a big 'D' Democrat, but some of us also value the underlying meaning of that word.

I don't see much democracy in the Assembly, whatever its Democratic majority.  And Silver can no longer pretend that 'Pataki makes me do it.  Pataki makes me do it.'

---

by: simonstl @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:59:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

am makes a good point... (4.00 / 1)

Spitzer made a back room deal and ended up getting stabbed in the back.

What have we learned?

Don't make any more backroom deals.

We've got some work ahead of us.

---

by: NYBri @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 18:23:34 PM UTC

no more backroom deals! (4.00 / 1)

Roger, that.

Spitzer does not look likely to do anymore "three smiling guys just stepped out of the room" press conferences.  How about every time he goes in the room in future, he lets Joe and Shelly know that Lipris is live-posting the proceedings at TAP as they speak?  Now, THAT would be sunshine!

---

by: robinia @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 19:29:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

no more backroom deals! (0.00 / 0)

Exactly!

---

by: am @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 20:15:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This "backroom deal" (0.00 / 0)

was weird from the get-go because it was an obvious attempt by Spitzer to horn in on a legislative prerogative.

The extra-legal process was doomed by the plain political fact that the Assembly Democrats, no matter who their leader was, wanted to choose one of their own for this job.

As is their right.

---

by: devtob @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:49:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

TAP's subhead is "behind that door (0.00 / 0)

are three men in a room."

For 12 years, Silver was our (NY Democrats) man in the room.

He did not create the system, but he did his best to lessen the impact of the Pataki/Boss Bruno steamroller.

I believe we (netroots Democratic types) should cut Silver a break on this, and not recklessly vow to do things in 2008 that are counter-productive to the ultimate goal -- a Democratic Senate by 2010.

---

by: devtob @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 02:00:30 AM UTC

I agree to an extent (4.00 / 2)

Yes the number one goal here should be to have a Democratic Senate ASAP. Silver wouldn't have the cover of the one house bill should we take the Senate. He would have to put true reform on the top of the list of stuff to do. If he didn't do that when the Dems took the Senate, then we can go after him. For now let us focus on applying some pressure on him by making the Senate Democratic and then worry about going after Silver should he kill reform.

Reality has a well known liberal Bias-Stephen Colbert

---

by: pierredude @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 02:56:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Silver... (0.00 / 0)

Yes, we could get a fully Democratic lej in the next year or two, but that would change nothing in the Assembly as Shelly has no reason to ever change the status quo... it works great for him and if the Senate were to flip... all the better... he would equate Democratic with what he's doing which is nothing short of despotic without necessarily the benevolent label. 

If you think the Senate Dems wouldn't capitalize on their newfound majority, think again... putting Bruno in his place would be entirely irresistable but detrimental to any higher ground the Senate Dems ever mentioned in reform efforts.


Nemo me impune lacessit - Who the heck is Nemo and why is he speaking Latin?

---

by: johnny2855131 @ Sun Feb 11, 2007 at 06:36:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

We've been here before... (0.00 / 0)

"Critics frequently remark that Roosevelt was the most masterful politician of his time, and what we have already seen of his career should justify this assertion. We need, however, to define what we mean by "politician." Boss Platt, of New York, was a politician, but far removed from Roosevelt. Platt and all similar dishonest manipulators of voters-and the dishonesty took many forms-held their power, not by principles, but by exerting an unprincipled influence over the masses who supported them. Roosevelt, on the other hand, was a great politician because he saw earlier than most men certain fundamental principles which he resolved to carry through whether the Bosses or their supporters liked it or not. In a word he believed in principles rather than in men. He was a statesman, and like the statesman he understood that half a loaf is often better than no bread and that, though he must often compromise and conciliate, he must surrender nothing essential.  1
  As a result, his career as Assemblyman, as Civil Service Commissioner, as Police Commissioner of New York City, as Governor of New York State, and as President, seems a continuous rising scale of success. We see the achievement which swallows up the baffling difficulties and the stubborn opposition. These we must always remember if we would measure the extent of the victory. It was Roosevelt's persistence and his refusal to be baffled or turned aside which really made him seem to triumph in all his work."

William Roscoe Thayer

I suppose people then thought Platt was going to stop Roosevelt.

---

by: clarkson @ Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 15:34:58 PM UTC

I don't read the Comptrollor brouhaha the same way (0.00 / 0)

T-U columnist Fred Lebrun whom I have a high regard for, said last week that the Assembly's action was NOT engineereed by Silver, but the whole Dem caucus, and the Republicans went along, rebelled against the 'deal' with Spitzer, and Shelly wisely got out of the way.

If that's the case, then the deal was not a deal, the body being sovereign, not Silver, and he made a mistake. Then the body went on to elect di Napoli as is their right and duty according to the particular law. Again the Repubs approved of di Napoli. As to his competence, my understanding is you have to be a good manager, not a CPA, to be Comptroller.

Again if that's the case, then the Governor's denunciation is out of place, and his extreme language is VERY out of place to a coequal body, and the Gov better climb down.

Further, if the rank & file of the Assembly are asserting themselves, and beginning to act like other normal legislatures, that in itself is good news.

 

---

by: Tom from Troy @ Sun Feb 11, 2007 at 05:59:24 AM UTC