NY-Sen: CSEA Backs Gillibrand For Senate

CSEA is probably the 3rd most powerful union in the state (4.00 / 1)

Next to 1199 and NYSUT.  So yes, this is a big deal.

The more endorsements that Gillibrand racks up before Maloney even declares her campaign, the less likely she is to do so.  

---

by: BingChester @ Thu Jul 30, 2009 at 17:44:09 PM UTC

This isn't going well for Maloney. (4.00 / 1)

This endorsement doesn't matter much, in the grand scheme.

The fact that it's happening in July of 2009 matters a lot.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Thu Jul 30, 2009 at 19:46:00 PM UTC

So much for the "Democratic" Party (2.00 / 2)

It is unfortunate that the factotums in state Democratic Party are hell bent on depriving progressives of a choice in this election and are railroading through the former "blue dog" Democrat -- current chameleon Democrat's -- nomination.

This union member (United Steelworkers) is very disappointed.

I did, however, appreciate Clyde Haberman's perspective in The Times today:

July 31, 2009
NYC
A Primary for Senator? Get Serious
By CLYDE HABERMAN

[snip]

Democratic Party elders have worked overtime to keep Kirsten E. Gillibrand, New York's appointed junior senator, from facing any serious threat in a 2010 primary. With a mighty assist from the Obama White House, they have tried to frighten off anyone who could give her a tough run. They seem quite good at being scary. A Long Island congressman, Steve Israel, got the message and dropped all thoughts of a race. So did Scott M. Stringer, the Manhattan borough president.

A few people may yet run. But the only one with reasonably broad name recognition is Representative Carolyn B. Maloney of the Upper East Side.

Ms. Maloney has made a big deal of saying that she will announce her candidacy. A formal declaration of sorts was expected early this week. Nothing happened. Those who pay attention to these things have been left to wonder if an announcement is still to come, or if waiting for Ms. Maloney ranks with waiting for Godot. Or maybe Guffman.

Whatever the congresswoman decides, the Empire State's Democratic chieftains could not be blunter about their druthers: They don't want Ms. Gillibrand to break into so much as a mild sweat in a primary.

Politicians are always prattling on about the glories of democracy. They boast about how they got rid of those nasty smoke-filled back rooms, where sebaceous party hacks used to select the candidates, and replaced them with primaries and with openness.

Truth is, politicians hate primaries. Those who are in command do, anyway. They go out of their way to knock off anyone who opposes their preferred candidates, apparently in the belief that matters of such weight cannot be left to lesser mortals, sometimes known as voters.

In this regard, New York Republicans and Democrats are equal offenders. The state Republicans under Gov. George E. Pataki worked hard to shut out any challenge to their designated favorites in the state's presidential primaries: Bob Dole in 1996 and George W. Bush in 2000. Party bosses would have gotten their way, too, had the courts not intervened and said, uh-uh.

With Ms. Gillibrand, the Democratic desire to eliminate democratic competition is especially striking because not a single voter has had a chance to pass judgment on whether she belongs in the United States Senate.

It's not just that she was appointed. The man who named her, Gov. David A. Paterson, was not elected to his own office. It's a double whammy, intensified for some New Yorkers by Ms. Gillibrand's - how to put it - demonstrated flexibility on certain core issues.

"What's the point of a Democratic primary if we don't use that process?" said Liz J. Abzug, a political consultant who supports Ms. Maloney and has opposed those trying to keep the congresswoman out of the running.

[snip]

---

by: jwaggoner @ Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 20:29:00 PM UTC