Jon Cooper has been pondering a primary challenge to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand for months now. In an interviewed I conducted with him in the fall, he outlined a number of reasons why he would mount such a challenge while adding that he would make a decision on whether or not to run by year's end.
Today, Cooper held a press conference announcing the he will not run against Gillibrand. In addition, he announced that he is endorsing Gillibrand for Senate believing her to be the best candidate for the job.
In a tweet, Gillibrand said she was "honored" by the endorsement.
I am honored to receive the endorsement of one of Long Island's great leaders and champions of LGBT rights, Majority Leader Jon Cooper.
Cooper was considered a long-shot candidate because he would enter the race trying to make the leap from county legislator to U.S Senate. He would be in a better position than Jonathan Tasini, but still would face long odds.
Cooper's exit means that no elected officials from New York will face Gillibrand (unless something changes over the next several months).
Jon Cooper, the Suffolk County legislator who created an exploratory committee for a possible primary against Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, announced today that he will make his decision at a press conference on December 14.
Cooper made that announcement in an e-mail to supporters today. The e-mail is below:
It's been six months since I launched my exploratory campaign for the U.S. Senate. Since then, I've had the pleasure of meeting with New Yorkers all across our great state. This has given me the opportunity to hear about their concerns and frustrations, as well as their hopes for the future.
Running for the U.S. Senate is obviously a major decision with important consequences. As such, I felt a responsibility not to rush into a decision.
As a friend and supporter, I'm glad to advise you that I'll be announcing my decision at a press conference on Monday, December 14th. More details will be provided as the date approaches.
Thank you very much for your support and please accept my heartfelt wishes for a very happy Thanksgiving!
Best regards,
Jon Cooper
When I interviewed Cooper in September, he made it clear that he wasn't going to rush this decision. In the comments of that post, at least one person brought up that the end of the year seemed to be a bit late. I agree with that, but given Cooper's profile and the fact he is more willing than Jonathan Tasini to actually campaign in New York, making the decision this late in the year is not a huge issue. It's not as if Cooper is starting from scratch here. He is an elected official who does have a base and has a fairly large county (Suffolk) that he could win votes from.
So will he or won't he? We'll find out December 14. The guess for you, the reader, is: Should he or shouldn't he? Should he run and give Gillibrand a challenge? Or should he do the same thing that possible candidates did before and drop out?
Jon Cooper said it was an eye-opening moment for him. He was watching the press conference announcing Governor David Paterson's selection of Kirsten Gillibrand to serve as New York's junior U.S. senator. His spouse Rob inquired out loud if that was former Senator Alfonse D'Amato standing on the platform with her.
Last week, I spoke with Cooper about his possible candidacy, his career and why he is interested in running for a seat that was once held by Hillary Clinton, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Robert F. Kennedy.
At first, Cooper dismissed the notion that a former Republican U.S. senator from New York - the same man Senator Chuck Schumer beat in 1998 - would be at a ceremony for Republicans. But, much to his dismay, there D'Amato stood mere feet away from Gillibrand as she was introduced as New York's newest senator.
Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn't just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can't help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.
"Her past position (on gun control) was of concern," he said. "There are some people are distrustful of her evolution on this and other issues and are concerned about what they see as flip-flopping and see this as insincere or they question her character. I'm not saying I do. But there are those who do."
For Cooper, however, it is different. He is not yet a declared candidate but he is touting his own record and why, if he were to run, he should be considered a serious contender to Gillibrand.
"I have, many times over the years, took stances that might not have been politically popular with my constituents but I believed it was the right thing to do," he said.
As an openly gay and happily married man, Cooper is the father of five children he and his spouse Rob have adopted. He has served 10 years on the Suffolk County Legislature and currently is the majority leader for the legislature's Democrats. He lists two key pieces of legislation as highlights of his career. He wrote the first law banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving in the country. Since then, a number of states (including New York) have adopted such laws. In addition to that, Cooper also authored legislation that banned the sale of ephedra. That effort led to the federal government imposing a ban on the dietary supplement.
Jobs and the economy is an area that Cooper knows all too well. Cooper is running the family business, Spectronics Corporation, in Westbury. He said that while he is on the corporate side of things, he also is very much pro-labor and supports workers.
In the 2008 presidential primaries, Cooper backed an underdog named Barack Obama. Cooper was the first elected official from New York to endorse Obama and went on to be the Long Island chair of the Obama campaign. He said that, at the time, people asked him if he realized the political risk he was taking. Cooper said he had supported Hillary Clinton in the past but once he met Obama, he was sold. It was through the Obama campaign that Cooper met many grassroots organizers, some of whom are now aiding him in his exploratory efforts and organizing meet and greets throughout the state for people to meet him. Cooper was in upstate New York this weekend meeting voters in Buffalo and Rochester and will be back in upstate New York again, especially if he decides to run.
Cooper knows that he has a long way to go. He realizes that Gillibrand has millions in her bankroll. He realizes that she has received nearly every county chair's endorsement to date. But one thing he references to is that Obama was counted out too. No one thought Hillary Clinton could be beaten. But with the greatest grassroots campaign ever, Obama pulled it out in the primary and won the general election.
A vast majority of Obama organizers and activists that Cooper worked with in 2008 are urging him to run and are supporting him. Democratic clubs have urged him to run. Progressives are supporting him. And while he says he isn't comparing himself to Obama, the comparisons are glaring.
"The party establishment, for the most part, quite understandably is falling in line behind our Democratic incumbent senator regardless of how she got to that office," he said. "But she's the incumbent Democrat now and I expect most of the political establishment to back her. But a lot of the grassroots leaders that had been early supporters of Obama seem to be lining up behind me or at the very least, urging me to run so that we will have a choice, which is what this is all about: Offering Democrats in New York State a choice."
While Cooper doesn't have a full slate of issues on his platform yet (understandable at this stage), his platform stresses the importance of economic development, pushes for progressive values and support of the environment and the fight for health care, consumer protection, gun safety and middle class tax cuts.
So when will we know whether or not Cooper is running? He says by the end of the year he will have a decision. He is testing the waters right now to see just how much support he has and what the response is statewide. I spoke with him over the weekend and he seemed to be very pleased and excited by the response in Buffalo and Rochester. So we'll see just how far he is willing to go and if he is going to make an upset bid for the U.S. Senate.
The results coming in from New York City have given us a number of results to talk about. There were many key races down in the city tonight, so there is plenty to talk about.
In the Democratic primary for Mayor, Bill Thompson defeated Tony Avella in overwhelming fashion. Thompson, who was never threatened by Avella in the primary, won by nearly 150,000 votes. He earned 70 percent of the vote, which means he will be the Democratic nominee going into November's showdown with Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
The race to replace Thompson as Comptroller was hotly contested, but John Liu leads the primary, but looks to be short of the 40 percent needed to avoid a runoff. Liu beat out David Yassky, Melinda Katz and David Weprin for the nod. A runoff will be held in two weeks with Liu facing off against Yassky.
The Public Advocate's race was an interesting one on the Democratic side. In another tight race, Bill de Blasio has a slim lead over former Public Advocate Mark Green. A runoff will take place in this race as well.
There was a special election to fill the 38th Assembly District seat that was vacated by Anthony Seminerio, who resigned from the seat. Michael Miller, a Democrat, won tonight and will be the newest member of the New York State Assembly.
It was going to be tough for Mickey Kearns. Even though poll numbers said it was a close race, he faced an uphill battle against Mayor Byron Brown.
Tonight, Brown showed just how uphill that battle was.
Brown is the winner of the Democratic primary. As of this writing, with 92 percent reporting, Brown leads with 61 percent of the vote over Kearns, who has 39 percent. The margin of victory is over 8,000 votes and will continue to grow as the results finish coming in.
Defeating Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown should be a priority for all progressives in Buffalo and for progressives in New York. The reason? His ties to Steve Pigeon, which have been well documented.
The challenger to Brown is Mickey Kearns, a Buffalo Common Councilmember who started out as a long-shot to win because of Brown's perceived strong incumbent advantage.
According to our scientific 2 On Your Side and SurveyUSA poll, Brown has 48% of the vote, Kearns has 47%, and 5% are undecided.
There is a 4.2% margin of error.
580 likely voters in the City of Buffalo were part of the telephone survey last Wednesday and Thursday.
When you breakdown the numbers and look at the demographics, Brown leads among women 51% to Kearns' 43%. Among men, however, Kearns leads Brown 52% to 44%.
The divide is even deeper among race. Brown leads Kearns 86% to 13% among black voters. While Kearns leads among white voters 64% to 29%.
Two key issues also split voters. When asked about creating jobs in Buffalo, 56% select Brown over 39% for Kearns. But on the controversial topic of One Sunset 86% choose Kearns over 12% for Brown.
If you asked anyone in Buffalo a few months ago whether or not this would be a race, they probably would have said no. While Kearns was a known opponent, he didn't have a lot of traction. He isn't a bad option, but Brown is a force in Buffalo politics. That put Kearns in a tough spot.
With all of the problems and revelations involving Brown lately, it is hard for Brown to hold on to that strong advantage he had not so long ago. This is a race and everyone knows it.
The largest public employees union in New York - CSEA - announced today that they will support Gillibrand for Senate in the 2010 elections.
CSEA President Danny Donohue said Senator Gillibrand established a strong working relationship with CSEA during her years in the House of Representatives and she has continued to impress with her hard work and fresh ideas. Donohue made the announcement during a meeting of CSEA's 122 member statewide Board of Directors today.
"Senator Gillibrand is an important ally for CSEA members and other working people," Donohue said. "She understands the pressures that our members experience on and off the job and she has consistently worked with us. At a time when our state and nation face extraordinary challenges, we need extraordinary individuals representing New Yorkers in the US Senate."
"We are proud to make this announcement now and without any reservation because we know Senator Gillibrand will continue to serve New Yorkers well.
"I am honored to receive the endorsement of CSEA and the 300,000 members-hardworking New Yorkers in every part of our state. We have a lot of work to do together to move forward on President Obama's agenda to get America's economy working again, create good-paying jobs and repair our nation's broken health care system," Gillibrand said.
CSEA joins a growing number of New York unions that have lined up behind Gillibrand's campaign, including New York State United Teachers (NYSUT), United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1500 (UFCW), New York State Pipe Trades Association, New York State Public Employees Federation (PEF), National Federation of Federal Employees, New York State Council of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, and Office and Professional Employees Union.
I am actually a member of CSEA. I just received my membership card in the mail a few days ago. So this endorsement is excellent on many levels.
The strong labor backing Gillibrand has received will help her, not only in a primary, but also in the general election. As Gillibrand's profile grows and she becomes more widely known, it will be tough for anyone to put up a strong fight against her. That goes for Democrats and Republicans.
She is a very strong representative who knows that listening to her constituents, being open (her sunlight initiatives are a rarity in Washington D.C.) and showing leadership is key to winning over New Yorkers who are looking for her to replace Hillary Clinton. She has shown the ability to do all of that and has even shown an ability to embrace the progressive movement and netroots and fight for the same causes we have been battling for.
There are certain issues that steal the spotlight for short or long periods of time. Right now, health care is the focus of the media's attention and in Washington D.C., health care is the hot topic right now with Congress looking at reforming our broken system.
But one issue that should not be forgotten is the environment. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand hasn't forgotten about the importance the environment plays and why keeping our air and water clean and addressing the issues with climate change deserve to be a top priority.
But Sen. Gillibrand is hoping that it will pass, but not at the environment's expense. Earlier this month, she spoke out regarding one key element in the House bill that would give coal-fired power plants less regulation and strip the Environmental Protection Agency of its power to regulate those coal plants.
Environmental activists already have complained that the House bill is too friendly to polluters and have been urging the Senate to toughen it by selling more emissions allowances -- rather than donating most of them to businesses initially.
Senate deal-making also jeopardizes some of the last-minute agreements that were key to passage in the House. For instance, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is worried about a provision added to the House bill that would strip the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate pollution from coal-fired power plants -- language backed by lawmakers in coal mining states.
"The EPA has to have authority to regulate coal plants under the Clean Air Act," said Gillibrand, who has promised "to use every bit of persuasive power" she can to ensure the bill "reflects the needs of New York." Leaders in New York have been concerned about acid rain traced to coal-burning plants in the Midwest.
This provision was criticized by environmental activists for being too lenient on polluters in a bill supposedly touting clean (and green) energy. In response, progressives have led the charge to make sure that such a provision won't survive in the Senate version (and the future agreed upon version) of the bill. MoveOn has a petition you can sign voicing your opposition to the provision and also sent out an e-mail to New York members of MoveOn asking them to send a note of thanks to Sen. Gillibrand for being "one of the very first senators to speak out publicly against rolling back the Clean Air Act."
Here's an excerpt from that e-mail:
For years, New York has had some of the worst air pollution in the country. On top of local pollution, New Yorkers get tons of smog and acid rain blown in from out of state.
Now, coal industry lobbyists are trying to slip a provision into Obama's clean energy plan that would repeal a key part of the Clean Air Act. This would bring about a whole new generation of dirty coal power and make New York's pollution problems even worse.
But not if Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has anything to say about it. She's one of the very first senators to speak out publicly against rolling back the Clean Air Act.
...
Under the Clean Air Act, dirty coal-fired power plants are required to meet standards for their global warming pollution. The Bush administration refused to enforce these rules, but President Obama has already started taking steps to crack down.
That's why coal lobbyists are trying to repeal key sections of the Clean Air Act, letting coal plants off the hook and sticking New Yorkers with lots more pollution.
This rollback is the wrong thing to do, and it certainly doesn't belong in a "clean energy" bill. But the polluters might get away with it if champions in Congress don't fight back.
Sen. Gillibrand is fighting. She told the Albany Times-Union in an article that got picked up nationwide that "The EPA has to have authority to regulate coal plants under the Clean Air Act" and promised "to use every bit of persuasive power" to ensure the bill "reflects the needs of New York" by cutting power plant pollution.
MoveOn also thanked Sen. Gillibrand outside of her office in New York City:
Gillibrand has been at the forefront of many progressive issues during her time as a senator. This isn't the first time, but it is key since this legislation will be taken up by the Senate and there are already debates about what protections should be included (or excluded). Senators from coal-friendly states will be facing pressure to defend the interests of the industry. Gillibrand won't face such pressure, but she isn't going to let the best interests of coal be reflected in a bill that is supposed to be promoting clean and green energy.
But now she's in the Senate, representing all of New York rather than a small, and relatively conservative, slice of it. She's also facing a primary challenge from the liberal Carolyn Maloney. Gillibrand's response, in part, has been to emerge as an unexpectedly aggressive champion of the public option. "I believe that a robust not-for-profit public option must be a part of the health care reform package Congress passes this year," she wrote on the Huffington Post. "I feel that opening up a Medicare For All type system to everyone would lower costs and increase efficiency by injecting some much needed competition into the market." The post's title? "Help me fight for a public option!"
Of course, Ezra's post gives us the impression that support for a public option (a "Medicare for all" system) is something new to Gillibrand that is only a matter of convenience. His argument in the post ties Gillibrand with Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter and his attempt to sway progressive voters in the Democratic Party by doing things like attending Netroots Nation in Pittsburgh.
But what Ezra misses is a long-held belief by Gillibrand that the only way to reform our health care system is by implementing a public option. This isn't something new. This isn't something she wrote in a blog post only to appeal to progressives.
In fact, Gillibrand has been advocating for a public option since her first campaign in 2006.
According to OnTheIssues, Gillibrand's 2006 campaign website featured as her platform on health care all of the following:
- Allow anyone to buy into Medicare
- Increase funding and access to rural health care
- Insure every child in America Prescription Drugs
- Allow the government to negotiate directly with the drug companies for Medicare
- Allow the U.S. to import drugs from Canada
Gillibrand favors allowing Americans to buy into the Medicare system; Swee ney denounced her proposal as a move toward universal health care.
Medicare has less overhead than private insurers with high CEO salaries, she said. "I think we need more competition in the system. The whole health-care system is being framed by the health-care industry," Gillibrand said. "What Americans need to do is focus on a preventative care system."
Sweeney dismissed Gillibrand's proposal.
"She's proposing a government-run universal health care system. That's been a disaster. Anywhere it's been applied anywhere in the world, it's done nothing but stifle innovation and made services less available to people who need them," he said. "We have expanded health-care insurance access by virtue of incentivizing it for small businesses in the private sector."
There are those who will argue that Gillibrand has made a shift on some issues from being a moderate (or conservative) to being a progressive. They will point to her stance on guns, her support for marriage equality and other issues simply to paint her as a "flip-flopper."
But if there is one issue you can't do that with it is health care. Gillibrand's support for a public option was evident in 2006 when she was campaigning in the 20th congressional district. She did not change that stance while she was serving in the House of Representatives and is now fighting to make sure that a public option is included in any health care reform that the Congress completes.
The lumping in of Gillibrand with Specter was also something Ezra did (and others have done recently) which isn't quite accurate. For example, since Gillibrand's stance on health care has always been one supportive of a public option, then she has held a progressive stance on that issue. Obviously, that's something she hasn't been given enough credit for because it's easy to paint her as a conservative Democrat from a conservative upstate New York district.
But the comparisons are way off. Gillibrand has shown us a progressive side that was waiting to be unleashed. As we have seen with some Democratic representatives like Congressman Eric Massa, there is only so much you can say or do without putting yourself at risk of being threatened come election time. Gillibrand was in the same position - until she became a U.S. senator.
Now she has reinforced her belief in a public option. She has advocated for a repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and has shown support for gun control and gun safety initiatives she was once accused of opposing.
Specter is no comparison. He is a Republican who decided that the Democratic Party was now his party of choice. Maybe the tide in Pennsylvania told him that. Now, he has the Democratic establishment and party leaders in Pennsylvania supporting his re-election efforts. And he has the support from one of New York's "great Democrats": Steve Pigeon.
The Gillibrand-Specter comparisons can quit. Specter isn't even close to being progressive. And while Gillibrand will continue to prove that she is a progressive, keep in mind that her support for a public option was there even when she was a member of the Blue Dog Coalition. And with the opposition from Blue Dog members in the House to health care reform, that is something worth highlighting.
Gillibrand has always supported the right option: The public option.
Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn't just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can't help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.
