| I had the opportunity during this campaign to meet and talk with the three candidates I hadn't met before. Two of the three impressed me in some fashion that made me seriously consider them; the third impressed me not at all.
I've known both Eric Schneiderman and Richard Brodsky for several years, and have been impressed with their willingness to tackle tough challenges and their desire to go into areas that other avoid or ignore. I would be very comfortable with either one as Attorney General.
Sean Coffey sounds impressive in person, and makes a good case. My concern is that I don't know him well enough to be comfortable with him as Attorney General. He has contributed in recent years to Republicans, though not nearly as much as to Democrats. He has also contributed a whale of a lot of money, giving the air of someone who is trying to buy his way into politics. I'm not saying that's his motive, and his complete openness about making lots of large campaign contributions is refreshing, but at the very least it gives the lie to his claim as an outsider, just as Michael Bloomberg was really no outsider when he first ran for mayor in 2001.
Eric Dinallo certainly has the resume, having been in the AG's office and working on some of the key cases. My problem with Dinallo is that, while I believe him to be a great #2 person, I don't see him as a #1. His demeanor seems to me to be abrasive, both personally when he tried too hard to be funny and in a debate I attended when he came off as a pit bull. We have had enough abrasive personalities running things in Albany, from Eliot Spitzer to Pedro Espada; we don't need another.
The one I wasn't impressed with was Kathleen Rice. In addition to being a lifelong Republican who never voted, her stump speech is basically "I'm a prosecutor with this great family history." Sorry, but that doesn't cut it if you're running for AG. We've had enough of that "law & order" and "tough on crime" right-wing garbage over the past several decades; it doesn't solve problems and it doesn't really accomplish anything. In addition, she's accusing Schneiderman of contributing $850K to his campaign, when in fact that was a transfer from his old state senate campaign committee -- and she has transferred over $2.6 million from her old DA campaign committee; talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
The reason Eliot Spitzer was such a successful AG was that he redefined the office to include things nobody else had done. Andrew Cuomo had no choice but to carry on what Spitzer started, and whoever succeeds him will be similarly required to continue those efforts (unless it's a Republican). What we need in the next AG is someone to redefine the role and the office again, and Eric Schneiderman is the only one from whom I'm hearing real change ideas. His innocence project, for example, is just one way the new AG can make a real difference in the lives of New Yorkers, particularly those most in need of government help.
In addition, Eric's accomplishments in the Senate, such as reforming the Rockefeller drug laws and redefining where prisoners officially live for the purpose of redistricting, show a truly progressive and creative mind at work.
Eric has also earned the support and endorsement from just about every organization representing people of color in this state. (Note: I wrote "just about," because I'm sure there are a few such groups who endorsed someone else, but the overwhelming majority have endorsed Schneiderman.) He has earned the support of those who, despite decades of advancement in the law and in society, are still far short of achievement equal justice under law -- and the state's "head of the department of law" should be someone committed to providing that equal justice.
Finally, this is essentially a two-horse race, between Schneiderman and Rice (based on a recent Rice campaign poll), with Coffey a dark horse on the outside only because he has "loaned" his campaign millions of dollars. Dinallo and Brodsky really have very little, if any, chance of winning the nomination.
Being a two-horse race, and seeing the enormous gulf between Schneiderman and Rice on both real achievement and vision, I really cannot support anyone but Schneiderman. |
