All Politics is Local
Nevermind the egregious use of a cliche. Primary Day is coming up here in New York City. Because many of the the offices are not seriously contested by another party, the primaries often are the real general elections, especially for those offices where a competitive race is expected. Here are the races I've paid attention to and my thoughts about the coming September 13th primaries:
Mayor of the City of New York
The Incumbent
Michael R. Bloomberg (R)
Very comfortable on a pile of cash.
Mayor Bloomberg was elected as the successor to Rudy Giuliani in 2001 by winning a close general election over Democratic nominee Mark Green, 50-47 percent. He was able to overcome a huge deficit in the polls by three main factors: a bruising primary runoff for the Democratic nomination between Green and Fernando Ferrer that left bitter feels up to Election Day, the endorsement of newly-minted hero Mayor Giuliani, and virtually unlimited funds due to his massive wealth.
Since then, Bloomberg has become a household name for New Yorkers, for better or for worse. His policies have often been controversial amongst New Yorkers, the most prominent of those being the smoking ban in all bars and restaurants, a large proprty tax hike, his push for New York to host the 2012 Summer Olympics, and, tied very closely to the then-Olympic dream, large amounts of state and city aid to build a football stadium over the Hudson Rail Yards on the Far West Side of Manhattan for the New York Jets football team and to use as an Olympic venue. That stadium, which would have cost at least $1.5 billion was ultimately defeated several months ago, before the host city for the 2012 Games was chosen. Additionally, the mayor rarely makes a push to those controlling the budgets in Albany and Washington that New York City should get its fair share of funding, given all the tax dollars that it produces. Also, the mayor has not taken to the airwaves to whip up anger over the state's handling of the area's transportation agency, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, though the mayor's actual power over the agency is minimal.
On the other hand, other things have gone well for the mayor. Crime has continued to fall, with records set each year, especially in murders. (Citywide CompStat, PDF) The city budget has been balanced, but during the next term, the city is facing large budget shortfalls, according to the Office of the Comptroller. The mayor has also taken control of the city's school system, a move supported by most voters since this eliminated the Board of Education. The West Side Stadium fell through and as such, is no longer a negative campaign issue for the mayor. And the mayor launched 311, a number any resident can dial to find information on virtually anything in the city as well as non-emergency police action. Lastly, after dealing with low approval numbers for most of the term, Mayor Bloomberg now has a 64% approval rating amongst registered voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll published August 18.
It seems that victory for him is nearly assured, given the polls and his ever more effective political machine. However, Bloomberg faced long odds of his own in 2001 yet came back to win. Much depends on the Democratic nominee and the remaining two months of the campaign season.
The Challengers
The four Democratic challengers, each one vying to face off against Bloomberg in the general election, have struggled to gain the citywide spotlight. One of the candidates, Fernando Ferrer, is relatively well-known, while the others, are mostly known within their own spheres of influence. Alas, each one of the candidates does not have the financial power that Bloomberg has, having instead to rely on fundraising and matching funds from the Campaign Finance Board.
Fernando Ferrer (D)
Likely will not get 40% on September 13
Fernando Ferrer is the most recognizable of the four Democrats seeking their party's nomination. Ferrer lost a close run-off election to Mark Green for the 2001 Democratic nomination for Mayor. Ferrer also served on the City Council from 1982 to 1987 and was Bronx Borough President from 1987 through 2001. In his second bid for Mayor, Ferrer is running on a "man of the people" platform, focusing on affordable housing for New Yorkers. His ultimate goal would be to form a coalition between blacks and Hispanics (a tactic also tried in 2001) that would be a powerful voting bloc. Thus far, it has not happened. To avoid a runoff primary election with the runner-up, Ferrer needs to get at least 40% of the vote on September 13. Amongst likely Democratic primary voters, the Quinnipiac poll shows Ferrer has only 33%.
In the last debate between the Democratic hopefuls, on WCBS-TV on August 21, Ferrer stayed guarded for much of the debate, not needing to engage the other candidates for the entire hour given his comfortable lead in the polls.
Clara Virginia Fields (D)
Fading fast.
C. Virginia Fields is the current Manhattan Borough President who will be term-limited out of that job at the end of this year. Fields has also been a former member of the City Council and worked to advance civil rights for black Americans four decades ago. Fields has been slipping at the polls for several months, especially with several minor scandals hurting her recently. The biggest scandal was a campaign flyer which had Fields in the middle of a crowd of people from all walks of life and all backgrounds. It was revealed that the diverse people in the picture were Photoshopped on there by her staff. With that, her top campaign adviser was let go. Recently, Fields has been suspected of using a city driver to take her to campaign events and not for her duties as Borough President and that her campaign had not reinbursed the city for the driver. In that time, Fields has dropped from a comfortable second place spot in the polls, which would put her in a showdown with Ferrer should he not win 40% of the vote, to a statistical tie with the other two candidates for second place. The Quinnipiac poll currently has her at 17%.
Her campaign has been touting her plan to recover jobs as well as plans to increase the quality of education in the city. However, the campaign has not given many specifics into the plan. This problem was compounded during the last debate when Fields refused to give details about her plans to pay for opening firehouses that were closed by Bloomberg and also on her education and job recovery plans.
Alan Gifford Miller (D)
Young face in the race.
Gifford Miller may look young...and, well, he is. At 35 years of age, he is the youngest competitor for the nomination. However, he carries with him nearly a decade of political experience as a member of the New York City Council since 1996(and since 2002, serving as the Speaker) and previously was the Chief of Staff for Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). He often comes across as a silver spoon who is out of touch with common people. Although he is from the Upper East Side, he is working to gain votes in the outer boroughs to challenge the natural Hispanic base that Ferrer has.
Miller's emphasizes a few key points. Education is at the top of his agenda, specifically, lowering class sizes to 17 students in a class for grades kindergarten through third with slightly higher sizes in higher grades. There is also his plan to press the state and federal governments to fund New York City as much as city tax dollars fund government coffers. According to Miller's campaign, the state and local governments take $24 billion more from the city than they give back. The other major pillar on Miller's agenda is to take control of New York City Transit (under the MTA) by making the head of the NYC Transit Authority accountable to the Mayor and not the Governor. Additionally, Miller has slammed the MTA over their mismanagement of money, the delays in construction and maitenance, and the security and treatment of the riders that depend on the extensive mass transit network.
A large problem plaguing the Miller campaign is the use of at least $1.5 million in taxpayer money to mail 5.5 million flyers touting Miller's victories and plans as Council Speaker along with the city councilman of the people receiving the flyer in the mail. Technically, it has not violated Campaign Finance Board rules and there are no punishments coming to Miller for the mailings, but it has left a bitter taste in the mouths of some attentive voters.
In the latest Quinnipiac poll, Miller is polling at 17%, higher than he has polled in the past.
Anthony Weiner (D)
Experienced and catching up.
Anthony Weiner is the current congressman for the 9th Congressional District, which serves parts of Brooklyn and Queens. He is also relatively young, as he will turn 41 next week. However, he, like Miller, has packed experience into his years. He has worked for then-Congressman Charles Schumer, served on the City Council from 1991 to 1998 then was elected to Schumer's congressional seat when Schumer was elected to the Senate. Weiner is competing with Miller to gain the votes of those likely primary voters in the outer boroughs.
Weiner's main focus in this campaign is the middle class. Specifically, his plans call for a 10% tax cut for New Yorkers making under $150,000. Additionally, he wants to raise teachers' salaries to better compete with higher-paying jobs in the suburbs to better recruit and retain teachers for city public schools. To pay for these expensive propositions, Weiner plans to cut or reform the least efficient city programs each year and create a new tax bracket for New Yorkers earning over $1 million, among other ideas.
Weiner has also shown to be ahead of the game when it came to stadium building in the city. While the mayor was pushing for the West Side Stadium, Weiner was promoting a new stadium in Willets Point, Queens, near Shea Stadium (outside of his district). There has since been a plan from the mayor and the two major league baseball teams (Yankees and Mets) to build new stadiums for each of them. The Mets' new stadium will be....near Shea.
The Quinnipiac has Weiner polling with 16%, well within the margin of error of +/- 4.4% so that he is statistically tied for second.
The poll includes undecided voters who lean towards a candidate. Additionally, the poll says 51% among those likely Democratic voters might still change their mind before the primary and that 44% will vote for Bloomberg if their candidate does not win the primary.
____________________________________________
Personally, I'm torn between Miller and Weiner, leaning towards Weiner. Both candidates have had detailed plans for their campaigns. Both have opposed the mayor on multiple fronts. I'm not completely against voting for Bloomberg. I may even vote for him should Ferrer or Fields be the nominee. However, I would do so reluctantly. I feel that Miller and Weiner would better be able to benefit the middle class, on bread-and-butter issues, rather than the grand schemes Bloomberg always envisions. Although Albany controls so much of the city's destiny, Bloomberg has rarely lifted a finger to fight for the funding from the state and the federal governments that this city needs and deserves. And while tax plans have to be approved by Albany to take effect, a strong advocate for the city is better than nothing.
One advantage to Miller in my eyes was his reaction to the mess at the MTA. Sitting behind the City Council in their chambers in City Hall last November, I had the opportunity to hear the Speaker firsthand. While the Council has no authority over the MTA, Miller brought the plight of those who use the private bus lines that were due to be bought by the MTA suffer through the lack of service and on how the MTA had squandered opportunity after opportunity to increase service for those customers, spending its money in the process.
Ferrer has been an advocate for affordable housing, however, it only benefits a smaller segment of the population. The affordable housing units that are often tied into larger development projects are not of much use to a person of moderate or even a fairly good income that has a tough time meeting the expenses of the city. Ferrer said that bold solutions are needed for the problems, however, bold doesn't always equal best.
Bloomberg's record is mixed, in my opinion. He raised property taxes by large amounts when the city was facing a budget crisis. The past couple of years, he has given a rebate to property owners. The problem is, those owners who have tenants often pass along the costs of those increased taxes to the tenants. Those that were in private apartments faced rent hikes of well over 10 and 20 and even up to 30 percent when it came time for a new lease. Those tenants did not get the benefit of a rebate check. The West Side Stadium plan, I thought, would have been a bad deal to make, at least the way it was done. First, both the city and the state were going to finance part of the building. True, the New York Jets would pay the bulk of the stadium bill, however, they would have gotten a sweetheart deal for the right to build a platform over the rail yards. The MTA would not have gotten as much money as it could have and would be another reason why it keeps crying to the public while raising fares. But since the deal fell through after months of work, this is no longer an issue, at least until New York City might try for the 2016 Summer Olympics.
I do not agree with the blanket smoking ban. If there is a smoking section or a bar that permits smoking, then post it on the door and let customers decide whether to go in or not.
On the positives, he has continued to ensure that crime continued to drop in the city, credit mostly going to the Police Commissioner but often times a mayor's priorities guide the police as well. Additionally, he has gained control of the city schools, making them accountable to him. There is a long way to go, but there are signs of improvement in the schools.
Virginia Fields has been an utter disappointment. Lack of plans, lack of vision, and a lack of a strong campaign have completely turned me off concerning her candidacy. How she manages to poll at 17% given this campaign escapes me.
If I had to choose today, I would vote for Anthony Weiner. Second choice Miller. Third choice a toss-up between Bloomberg and Ferrer. Fields is completely out of the picture for me.
Public Advocate
The "vice president" of New York City is the Public Advocate. The position is not known by many New Yorkers and even less know that the Public Advocate takes over as Mayor should the Mayor be unable to serve for any reason. The office of Public Advocate was created in 1989 after widespread revisions to the city's charter, essentially a renamed City Council President, whose primary power was voting on the budget. That voting power has been eliminated and the only specific power of the Public Advocate other than succeeding the mayor is to break tie votes in the City Council (there have yet to be any). Because of this, there is some confusion about the other duties of the Public Advocate. With the 2005 campaign season upon us, the differences in the Public Advocate race are even greater than standard-fare differences on bread-and-butter issues. The differences come because the candidates have different ideas on what the office is supposed to be.
Due to a lack of real Republican opposition, the primary on September 13 is essentially the general election for this office.
The Incumbent
Betsy Gotbaum (D)
Seeking to crush the opposition.
Betsy Gotbaum escaped from a crowded and competitive field in 2001 to get to a run off against Norman Siegel, where she eventually won and went on to win 86% of the vote in the general election. Since then, she has been fairly low profile in the nearly four years she has been in office. Recently, her report on the failure of MTA turnstiles to read Metrocards has caught some attention. Most of what she is known for is her opposition to the MTA's practices and maitenance, though she was outspoken in her opposition to the West Side Stadium.
Her view is that the Public Advcoate's role is to be a citywide elected official that handles the problems and complaints of New Yorkers.
In the Quinnipiac poll published August 18, Gotbaum is polling at 38%, just shy of the 40% cutoff in order to avoid a runoff election.
(Question 14 on the poll)
The Main Challengers
There are two main challengers to Gotbaum's incumbency. One of them is a long-shot, but has been energizing the debate over what the Public Advocate's job is supposed to be. The other is a veteran when it comes to speaking out against the city government.
Norman Siegel (D)
Challenging again.
Norman Siegel is a civil rights lawyer that ran for Public Advocate in 2001 and lost in the runoff to Gotbaum after narrowly beating the rest of the crowded field to earn the second place in the runoff, coming just ahead of former City Councilman Stephen DiBrienza. He has previous experience on former Mayor Giuliani's Commission on Police-Community Relations and as a lawyer for various groups seeking the right to protest and for people seeking to prevent the building of an arena in Brooklyn for a relocated New Jersey Nets basketball team.
His view is that the Public Advocate should go to court on behalf of the public when necessary.
The Quinnipiac poll puts him in second place thus far, with 25%.
Andrew Rasiej(D)
Technology and upstart combined as one.
Andrew Rasiej is experienced with technology in his business life. His main goal, should be be elected Public Advocate, would be to make wireless Internet availiable to all New Yorkers. With that, New Yorkers can also put photos on a system created by Rasiej to point out common problems such as potholes and also to show how long it takes for the city to respond to such problems.
The Quinnipiac poll places him far behind with 6%.
____________________________________________
Maybe not much would change no matter who is elected Public Advocate at this point. They all agree that the office needs to be granted greater powers, though I am unsure how they would be able to gain such an expansion. This election may come down to what voters think the office should be. With that said, my views on the office are more in line with Norman Siegel's vision, fighting on behalf of the public, even if it's against the Mayor or the City Council. He represented some questionable groups that asked for the right to protest, but he has defended them on the basis of the rights, not on their political views. I view the Public Advocate office to be what Betsy Gotbaum thinks it should be, as a watchdog and a place to turn to when one cannot make any headway with a city bureaucracy, but I think the office should also have a more active role, as Siegel has proposed. It's essentially a toss-up between the two, leaning towards Siegel.
But then, it might not even matter without the expanded powers.
Brooklyn Borough President
The Incumbent
Marty Markowitz (D, WFP)
Cheerleader-in-Chief
The office of Borough President, in each of the five boroughs of New York City, has had its power decrease since the revisions to the city charter eliminated the Board of Estimate in 1989. See section "From Lindsay to Giuliani" and these lines from MSN Encarta:
"The transformation of the economy has been matched by substantial changes in government. In March 1989 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the powerful Board of Estimate, which controlled the city’s budget, was unconstitutional because it gave disproportionate weight to the less populous boroughs. Each borough had equal weight on the Board of Estimate, even though some had much smaller populations. Staten Island, for example, had only a fraction of the residents of Brooklyn and Queens. In November 1989 voters approved a revised charter, eliminating the Board of Estimate and reassigning its powers to the mayor, the city planning commission, and an expanded city council. In 1990 the new government system took effect."
Marty Markowitz is seeking a second and final term (due to term limits) as Brooklyn Borough President. His main jobs have been assisting residents with city services and oversees and decides on land issues in the borough. He also touts the borough at every opportunity, effectively being a salesman or cheerleader for the borough, promoting its own tourist attractions and other places of interest.
After emerging from the primaries in 2001, Markowitz went on to win 76% of the vote in the general election. With a massive campaign war chest and little serious opposition from would-be contenders (Gotham Gazette), Markowitz is a lock for winning his second term. There has been some speculation that Markowitz will seek to use the office as a launching pad for contention in the 2009 mayoral election.
Although he did speak at my graduation from Brooklyn Technical High School, a place I grew to dislike due to its administration, I realize that Markowitz has nonetheless done a decent, if not good, job as Borough President given the limitations of the office. And with no real competition to speak of, Markowitz is very, very easy to support.
(WFP = Working Families Party)
City Council District 45
Maybe not so important in the grand scheme of things, but this is my adopted City Council District (having recently moved from an apartment that was in District 46).
The Incumbent
Kendall Stewart (D)
Not effective.
Kendall Stewart was first elected to the City Council in 2001 after surviving a competitive and close primary. That's pretty much all there is to the story. Stewart has hardly been active in the City Council since. He managed to win re-election in 2003 after another tough primary challenge. He managed this even though there was a large dispute over a building he owned concerning lead paint and his statement on the tenants (see previous link). Now it's 2005 and a challenger that has fought him these past two elections is looking to turn the tide this year.
I have yet to find a campaign website for Kendall Stewart.
The Challenger
Samuel Taitt (D)
Third time a charm?
Samuel Taitt is running for the third time for this City Council seat. He lost in close primaries the previous two times and is hoping that now is the time that he can defeat Stewart and win the seat. He has pointed out Stewart's inaction in his years on the Council. His campaign website has not offered specifics but rather a broad view that seems designed to appeal to anyone looking for a different face in the seat. He is working to establish a community credit union to provide an alternative to conventional banks that may not extend helping hands to residents. Further, he has worked on education and economic development projects within the district and also hosts a weekly cable TV show about the district.
The New York Times endorsed Taitt in his third run. I also endorse Mr. Taitt. I'm not overly impressed with the campaign, however, he has done things for the district, which is mostly Caribbean, while Councilman Stewart has been avoiding work. This is all the more reason to endorse Samuel Taitt. Though, against Councilman Stewart, I would endorse almost any candidate that were to seriously challenge him.
(If you cannot read the Times' piece, you can find the relevant section here: Campaign 2005 for District 45)
City Council District 28
The Incumbent
Allan Jennings (D)
Has got to go.
Okay, this isn't my council district, but this should be brought to the attention of every New York City voter. This Councilman is a disgrace to the Council and should be voted out by those in District 28 this year. His scandals and general poor behavior have made him a poor advocate for the people of his district, and a blight on the Council in general.
The Council Ethics Committee found him guilty on charges of improperly firing an employee and creating a hostile work environment. With that ruling, he essentially stopped being a functioning member of the Council. Further reading: Queens Tribune
I don't have a dog in this race. However, the people of this district deserve a lot more than Allan Jennings has been providing.
With this, my grand City election post is over, having worked in it since August 29th, I'm glad I'm finally done. But this was a worthwhile effort.
Mayor of the City of New York
The Incumbent
Michael R. Bloomberg (R)
Very comfortable on a pile of cash.
Mayor Bloomberg was elected as the successor to Rudy Giuliani in 2001 by winning a close general election over Democratic nominee Mark Green, 50-47 percent. He was able to overcome a huge deficit in the polls by three main factors: a bruising primary runoff for the Democratic nomination between Green and Fernando Ferrer that left bitter feels up to Election Day, the endorsement of newly-minted hero Mayor Giuliani, and virtually unlimited funds due to his massive wealth.
Since then, Bloomberg has become a household name for New Yorkers, for better or for worse. His policies have often been controversial amongst New Yorkers, the most prominent of those being the smoking ban in all bars and restaurants, a large proprty tax hike, his push for New York to host the 2012 Summer Olympics, and, tied very closely to the then-Olympic dream, large amounts of state and city aid to build a football stadium over the Hudson Rail Yards on the Far West Side of Manhattan for the New York Jets football team and to use as an Olympic venue. That stadium, which would have cost at least $1.5 billion was ultimately defeated several months ago, before the host city for the 2012 Games was chosen. Additionally, the mayor rarely makes a push to those controlling the budgets in Albany and Washington that New York City should get its fair share of funding, given all the tax dollars that it produces. Also, the mayor has not taken to the airwaves to whip up anger over the state's handling of the area's transportation agency, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, though the mayor's actual power over the agency is minimal.
On the other hand, other things have gone well for the mayor. Crime has continued to fall, with records set each year, especially in murders. (Citywide CompStat, PDF) The city budget has been balanced, but during the next term, the city is facing large budget shortfalls, according to the Office of the Comptroller. The mayor has also taken control of the city's school system, a move supported by most voters since this eliminated the Board of Education. The West Side Stadium fell through and as such, is no longer a negative campaign issue for the mayor. And the mayor launched 311, a number any resident can dial to find information on virtually anything in the city as well as non-emergency police action. Lastly, after dealing with low approval numbers for most of the term, Mayor Bloomberg now has a 64% approval rating amongst registered voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll published August 18.
It seems that victory for him is nearly assured, given the polls and his ever more effective political machine. However, Bloomberg faced long odds of his own in 2001 yet came back to win. Much depends on the Democratic nominee and the remaining two months of the campaign season.
The Challengers
The four Democratic challengers, each one vying to face off against Bloomberg in the general election, have struggled to gain the citywide spotlight. One of the candidates, Fernando Ferrer, is relatively well-known, while the others, are mostly known within their own spheres of influence. Alas, each one of the candidates does not have the financial power that Bloomberg has, having instead to rely on fundraising and matching funds from the Campaign Finance Board.
Fernando Ferrer (D)
Likely will not get 40% on September 13
Fernando Ferrer is the most recognizable of the four Democrats seeking their party's nomination. Ferrer lost a close run-off election to Mark Green for the 2001 Democratic nomination for Mayor. Ferrer also served on the City Council from 1982 to 1987 and was Bronx Borough President from 1987 through 2001. In his second bid for Mayor, Ferrer is running on a "man of the people" platform, focusing on affordable housing for New Yorkers. His ultimate goal would be to form a coalition between blacks and Hispanics (a tactic also tried in 2001) that would be a powerful voting bloc. Thus far, it has not happened. To avoid a runoff primary election with the runner-up, Ferrer needs to get at least 40% of the vote on September 13. Amongst likely Democratic primary voters, the Quinnipiac poll shows Ferrer has only 33%.
In the last debate between the Democratic hopefuls, on WCBS-TV on August 21, Ferrer stayed guarded for much of the debate, not needing to engage the other candidates for the entire hour given his comfortable lead in the polls.
Clara Virginia Fields (D)
Fading fast.
C. Virginia Fields is the current Manhattan Borough President who will be term-limited out of that job at the end of this year. Fields has also been a former member of the City Council and worked to advance civil rights for black Americans four decades ago. Fields has been slipping at the polls for several months, especially with several minor scandals hurting her recently. The biggest scandal was a campaign flyer which had Fields in the middle of a crowd of people from all walks of life and all backgrounds. It was revealed that the diverse people in the picture were Photoshopped on there by her staff. With that, her top campaign adviser was let go. Recently, Fields has been suspected of using a city driver to take her to campaign events and not for her duties as Borough President and that her campaign had not reinbursed the city for the driver. In that time, Fields has dropped from a comfortable second place spot in the polls, which would put her in a showdown with Ferrer should he not win 40% of the vote, to a statistical tie with the other two candidates for second place. The Quinnipiac poll currently has her at 17%.
Her campaign has been touting her plan to recover jobs as well as plans to increase the quality of education in the city. However, the campaign has not given many specifics into the plan. This problem was compounded during the last debate when Fields refused to give details about her plans to pay for opening firehouses that were closed by Bloomberg and also on her education and job recovery plans.
Alan Gifford Miller (D)
Young face in the race.
Gifford Miller may look young...and, well, he is. At 35 years of age, he is the youngest competitor for the nomination. However, he carries with him nearly a decade of political experience as a member of the New York City Council since 1996(and since 2002, serving as the Speaker) and previously was the Chief of Staff for Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). He often comes across as a silver spoon who is out of touch with common people. Although he is from the Upper East Side, he is working to gain votes in the outer boroughs to challenge the natural Hispanic base that Ferrer has.
Miller's emphasizes a few key points. Education is at the top of his agenda, specifically, lowering class sizes to 17 students in a class for grades kindergarten through third with slightly higher sizes in higher grades. There is also his plan to press the state and federal governments to fund New York City as much as city tax dollars fund government coffers. According to Miller's campaign, the state and local governments take $24 billion more from the city than they give back. The other major pillar on Miller's agenda is to take control of New York City Transit (under the MTA) by making the head of the NYC Transit Authority accountable to the Mayor and not the Governor. Additionally, Miller has slammed the MTA over their mismanagement of money, the delays in construction and maitenance, and the security and treatment of the riders that depend on the extensive mass transit network.
A large problem plaguing the Miller campaign is the use of at least $1.5 million in taxpayer money to mail 5.5 million flyers touting Miller's victories and plans as Council Speaker along with the city councilman of the people receiving the flyer in the mail. Technically, it has not violated Campaign Finance Board rules and there are no punishments coming to Miller for the mailings, but it has left a bitter taste in the mouths of some attentive voters.
In the latest Quinnipiac poll, Miller is polling at 17%, higher than he has polled in the past.
Anthony Weiner (D)
Experienced and catching up.
Anthony Weiner is the current congressman for the 9th Congressional District, which serves parts of Brooklyn and Queens. He is also relatively young, as he will turn 41 next week. However, he, like Miller, has packed experience into his years. He has worked for then-Congressman Charles Schumer, served on the City Council from 1991 to 1998 then was elected to Schumer's congressional seat when Schumer was elected to the Senate. Weiner is competing with Miller to gain the votes of those likely primary voters in the outer boroughs.
Weiner's main focus in this campaign is the middle class. Specifically, his plans call for a 10% tax cut for New Yorkers making under $150,000. Additionally, he wants to raise teachers' salaries to better compete with higher-paying jobs in the suburbs to better recruit and retain teachers for city public schools. To pay for these expensive propositions, Weiner plans to cut or reform the least efficient city programs each year and create a new tax bracket for New Yorkers earning over $1 million, among other ideas.
Weiner has also shown to be ahead of the game when it came to stadium building in the city. While the mayor was pushing for the West Side Stadium, Weiner was promoting a new stadium in Willets Point, Queens, near Shea Stadium (outside of his district). There has since been a plan from the mayor and the two major league baseball teams (Yankees and Mets) to build new stadiums for each of them. The Mets' new stadium will be....near Shea.
The Quinnipiac has Weiner polling with 16%, well within the margin of error of +/- 4.4% so that he is statistically tied for second.
The poll includes undecided voters who lean towards a candidate. Additionally, the poll says 51% among those likely Democratic voters might still change their mind before the primary and that 44% will vote for Bloomberg if their candidate does not win the primary.
____________________________________________
Personally, I'm torn between Miller and Weiner, leaning towards Weiner. Both candidates have had detailed plans for their campaigns. Both have opposed the mayor on multiple fronts. I'm not completely against voting for Bloomberg. I may even vote for him should Ferrer or Fields be the nominee. However, I would do so reluctantly. I feel that Miller and Weiner would better be able to benefit the middle class, on bread-and-butter issues, rather than the grand schemes Bloomberg always envisions. Although Albany controls so much of the city's destiny, Bloomberg has rarely lifted a finger to fight for the funding from the state and the federal governments that this city needs and deserves. And while tax plans have to be approved by Albany to take effect, a strong advocate for the city is better than nothing.
One advantage to Miller in my eyes was his reaction to the mess at the MTA. Sitting behind the City Council in their chambers in City Hall last November, I had the opportunity to hear the Speaker firsthand. While the Council has no authority over the MTA, Miller brought the plight of those who use the private bus lines that were due to be bought by the MTA suffer through the lack of service and on how the MTA had squandered opportunity after opportunity to increase service for those customers, spending its money in the process.
Ferrer has been an advocate for affordable housing, however, it only benefits a smaller segment of the population. The affordable housing units that are often tied into larger development projects are not of much use to a person of moderate or even a fairly good income that has a tough time meeting the expenses of the city. Ferrer said that bold solutions are needed for the problems, however, bold doesn't always equal best.
Bloomberg's record is mixed, in my opinion. He raised property taxes by large amounts when the city was facing a budget crisis. The past couple of years, he has given a rebate to property owners. The problem is, those owners who have tenants often pass along the costs of those increased taxes to the tenants. Those that were in private apartments faced rent hikes of well over 10 and 20 and even up to 30 percent when it came time for a new lease. Those tenants did not get the benefit of a rebate check. The West Side Stadium plan, I thought, would have been a bad deal to make, at least the way it was done. First, both the city and the state were going to finance part of the building. True, the New York Jets would pay the bulk of the stadium bill, however, they would have gotten a sweetheart deal for the right to build a platform over the rail yards. The MTA would not have gotten as much money as it could have and would be another reason why it keeps crying to the public while raising fares. But since the deal fell through after months of work, this is no longer an issue, at least until New York City might try for the 2016 Summer Olympics.
I do not agree with the blanket smoking ban. If there is a smoking section or a bar that permits smoking, then post it on the door and let customers decide whether to go in or not.
On the positives, he has continued to ensure that crime continued to drop in the city, credit mostly going to the Police Commissioner but often times a mayor's priorities guide the police as well. Additionally, he has gained control of the city schools, making them accountable to him. There is a long way to go, but there are signs of improvement in the schools.
Virginia Fields has been an utter disappointment. Lack of plans, lack of vision, and a lack of a strong campaign have completely turned me off concerning her candidacy. How she manages to poll at 17% given this campaign escapes me.
If I had to choose today, I would vote for Anthony Weiner. Second choice Miller. Third choice a toss-up between Bloomberg and Ferrer. Fields is completely out of the picture for me.
Public Advocate
The "vice president" of New York City is the Public Advocate. The position is not known by many New Yorkers and even less know that the Public Advocate takes over as Mayor should the Mayor be unable to serve for any reason. The office of Public Advocate was created in 1989 after widespread revisions to the city's charter, essentially a renamed City Council President, whose primary power was voting on the budget. That voting power has been eliminated and the only specific power of the Public Advocate other than succeeding the mayor is to break tie votes in the City Council (there have yet to be any). Because of this, there is some confusion about the other duties of the Public Advocate. With the 2005 campaign season upon us, the differences in the Public Advocate race are even greater than standard-fare differences on bread-and-butter issues. The differences come because the candidates have different ideas on what the office is supposed to be.
Due to a lack of real Republican opposition, the primary on September 13 is essentially the general election for this office.
The Incumbent
Betsy Gotbaum (D)
Seeking to crush the opposition.
Betsy Gotbaum escaped from a crowded and competitive field in 2001 to get to a run off against Norman Siegel, where she eventually won and went on to win 86% of the vote in the general election. Since then, she has been fairly low profile in the nearly four years she has been in office. Recently, her report on the failure of MTA turnstiles to read Metrocards has caught some attention. Most of what she is known for is her opposition to the MTA's practices and maitenance, though she was outspoken in her opposition to the West Side Stadium.
Her view is that the Public Advcoate's role is to be a citywide elected official that handles the problems and complaints of New Yorkers.
In the Quinnipiac poll published August 18, Gotbaum is polling at 38%, just shy of the 40% cutoff in order to avoid a runoff election.
(Question 14 on the poll)
The Main Challengers
There are two main challengers to Gotbaum's incumbency. One of them is a long-shot, but has been energizing the debate over what the Public Advocate's job is supposed to be. The other is a veteran when it comes to speaking out against the city government.
Norman Siegel (D)
Challenging again.
Norman Siegel is a civil rights lawyer that ran for Public Advocate in 2001 and lost in the runoff to Gotbaum after narrowly beating the rest of the crowded field to earn the second place in the runoff, coming just ahead of former City Councilman Stephen DiBrienza. He has previous experience on former Mayor Giuliani's Commission on Police-Community Relations and as a lawyer for various groups seeking the right to protest and for people seeking to prevent the building of an arena in Brooklyn for a relocated New Jersey Nets basketball team.
His view is that the Public Advocate should go to court on behalf of the public when necessary.
The Quinnipiac poll puts him in second place thus far, with 25%.
Andrew Rasiej(D)
Technology and upstart combined as one.
Andrew Rasiej is experienced with technology in his business life. His main goal, should be be elected Public Advocate, would be to make wireless Internet availiable to all New Yorkers. With that, New Yorkers can also put photos on a system created by Rasiej to point out common problems such as potholes and also to show how long it takes for the city to respond to such problems.
The Quinnipiac poll places him far behind with 6%.
____________________________________________
Maybe not much would change no matter who is elected Public Advocate at this point. They all agree that the office needs to be granted greater powers, though I am unsure how they would be able to gain such an expansion. This election may come down to what voters think the office should be. With that said, my views on the office are more in line with Norman Siegel's vision, fighting on behalf of the public, even if it's against the Mayor or the City Council. He represented some questionable groups that asked for the right to protest, but he has defended them on the basis of the rights, not on their political views. I view the Public Advocate office to be what Betsy Gotbaum thinks it should be, as a watchdog and a place to turn to when one cannot make any headway with a city bureaucracy, but I think the office should also have a more active role, as Siegel has proposed. It's essentially a toss-up between the two, leaning towards Siegel.
But then, it might not even matter without the expanded powers.
Brooklyn Borough President
The Incumbent
Marty Markowitz (D, WFP)
Cheerleader-in-Chief
The office of Borough President, in each of the five boroughs of New York City, has had its power decrease since the revisions to the city charter eliminated the Board of Estimate in 1989. See section "From Lindsay to Giuliani" and these lines from MSN Encarta:
"The transformation of the economy has been matched by substantial changes in government. In March 1989 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the powerful Board of Estimate, which controlled the city’s budget, was unconstitutional because it gave disproportionate weight to the less populous boroughs. Each borough had equal weight on the Board of Estimate, even though some had much smaller populations. Staten Island, for example, had only a fraction of the residents of Brooklyn and Queens. In November 1989 voters approved a revised charter, eliminating the Board of Estimate and reassigning its powers to the mayor, the city planning commission, and an expanded city council. In 1990 the new government system took effect."
Marty Markowitz is seeking a second and final term (due to term limits) as Brooklyn Borough President. His main jobs have been assisting residents with city services and oversees and decides on land issues in the borough. He also touts the borough at every opportunity, effectively being a salesman or cheerleader for the borough, promoting its own tourist attractions and other places of interest.
After emerging from the primaries in 2001, Markowitz went on to win 76% of the vote in the general election. With a massive campaign war chest and little serious opposition from would-be contenders (Gotham Gazette), Markowitz is a lock for winning his second term. There has been some speculation that Markowitz will seek to use the office as a launching pad for contention in the 2009 mayoral election.
Although he did speak at my graduation from Brooklyn Technical High School, a place I grew to dislike due to its administration, I realize that Markowitz has nonetheless done a decent, if not good, job as Borough President given the limitations of the office. And with no real competition to speak of, Markowitz is very, very easy to support.
(WFP = Working Families Party)
City Council District 45
Maybe not so important in the grand scheme of things, but this is my adopted City Council District (having recently moved from an apartment that was in District 46).
The Incumbent
Kendall Stewart (D)
Not effective.
Kendall Stewart was first elected to the City Council in 2001 after surviving a competitive and close primary. That's pretty much all there is to the story. Stewart has hardly been active in the City Council since. He managed to win re-election in 2003 after another tough primary challenge. He managed this even though there was a large dispute over a building he owned concerning lead paint and his statement on the tenants (see previous link). Now it's 2005 and a challenger that has fought him these past two elections is looking to turn the tide this year.
I have yet to find a campaign website for Kendall Stewart.
The Challenger
Samuel Taitt (D)
Third time a charm?
Samuel Taitt is running for the third time for this City Council seat. He lost in close primaries the previous two times and is hoping that now is the time that he can defeat Stewart and win the seat. He has pointed out Stewart's inaction in his years on the Council. His campaign website has not offered specifics but rather a broad view that seems designed to appeal to anyone looking for a different face in the seat. He is working to establish a community credit union to provide an alternative to conventional banks that may not extend helping hands to residents. Further, he has worked on education and economic development projects within the district and also hosts a weekly cable TV show about the district.
The New York Times endorsed Taitt in his third run. I also endorse Mr. Taitt. I'm not overly impressed with the campaign, however, he has done things for the district, which is mostly Caribbean, while Councilman Stewart has been avoiding work. This is all the more reason to endorse Samuel Taitt. Though, against Councilman Stewart, I would endorse almost any candidate that were to seriously challenge him.
(If you cannot read the Times' piece, you can find the relevant section here: Campaign 2005 for District 45)
City Council District 28
The Incumbent
Allan Jennings (D)
Has got to go.
Okay, this isn't my council district, but this should be brought to the attention of every New York City voter. This Councilman is a disgrace to the Council and should be voted out by those in District 28 this year. His scandals and general poor behavior have made him a poor advocate for the people of his district, and a blight on the Council in general.
The Council Ethics Committee found him guilty on charges of improperly firing an employee and creating a hostile work environment. With that ruling, he essentially stopped being a functioning member of the Council. Further reading: Queens Tribune
I don't have a dog in this race. However, the people of this district deserve a lot more than Allan Jennings has been providing.
With this, my grand City election post is over, having worked in it since August 29th, I'm glad I'm finally done. But this was a worthwhile effort.
posted by Will at 2:08 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home