| I worry that it's a figment of my imagination.
I really liked Liz Krueger's letter this morning, but it left me with a big question:
Is she really the only person in there fighting against "to the victor goes the spoils"?
So far, I'm afraid she's the only person talking about it, though I'm hoping that I've just missed something in the fray.
We obviously can't listen in on the Democratic caucus' closed meetings, or those of the Republicans either, but the current break in the frantic action at the Capitol seems like a good moment to assess who's really interested in decentralizing the Senate's power structures.
Possible candidates I've heard:
- Daniel Squadron
- Was testing out new processes in committee; certainly ran as a reformer against Connor.
- David Valesky
- Certainly ran on reform, still surfaces in conversation about it.
Sorry - I know that's a short list. I'm trying to stick to people who've continued in the reform conversation since the Democrats took power, and I worry that I may even be overstating it.
Anyone want to stick up for your favorite Senator? Or knock down these folks? How about on the Republican side? Is there anyone over there cursing years of working in lockstep and pushing for a deeply changed approach?
I know, with all State Senate Republicans claiming to be reformers these days, it's a little hard to differentiate them. But are there signs that maybe some of them mean it? |
